RAGHUNATH SETLURI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad �ी रवीश सूद, माननीय �या�यक सद�य एवं �ी मधुसूदन साव�डया, माननीय लेखा सद�य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.2084/Hyd/2025 (�नधा�रणवष�/ Assessment Year:2015-16) Raghunath Setluri, VS. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-9(1), PAN: DMWPS2455C Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ�/ Appellant) (��यथ�/ Respondent)

करदाताका��त�न�ध�व/ : Ms Smruthi, Advocate Assessee Represented by राज�वका��त�न�ध�व/ : Shri GV Pavan Kumar, Sr. AR Department Represented by सुनवाईसमा�तहोनेक��त�थ/ : 28/04/2026 Date of Conclusion of Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख/ : 30/04/2026 Date of Pronouncement ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dated 27/09/2025, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, “AO”) under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short,

2 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO “the Act”), dated 28/02/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds of appeal:

3 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO 3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain the source of the aforesaid financial transactions. As the assessee failed to come forth with an explanation regarding the aforesaid investment/expenditure to the satisfaction of the AO, he held the entire amount of the aforementioned financial transactions, viz., (i) payments against credit card bills: Rs.5,50,338/-; and (ii) investment in immovable property: Rs.1,33,00,000/- as the expenditure/investment of the assessee from unexplained sources under section 69 and 69C of the Act, respectively. Accordingly, the AO vide his order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 28/02/2024 determined the income of the assessee at Rs.1,38,50,338/-.

4 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO 6. We have heard the Learned Authorized Representatives of both parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and the material available on record. 7. Ms Smruti, Advocate, the Learned Authorized Representative (for short, “Ld. AR”) for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that as the assessee who was though a Resident of India during the subject year had thereafter settled in United Kingdom and was a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) during the period when his case was taken up for assessment. The Ld. AR submitted that as the case pertained to an old period, the assessee being a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) who was settled abroad could not collect the requisite documents, i.e., credit card statements (including bank statements) and copy of the purchase deed, thus could file the same with the AO, which, thus had resulted to an ex-parte order wherein the entire amount of the credit card expenses/investments had been added by the AO has having been sourced out of the unexplained income of the assessee. Elaborating further on her contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee was only a consenting party to the agreement of purchase of the immovable property in question and was not in possession of a copy of the same, therefore, it took him substantial time to collect the requisite details from the purchaser, which had resulted to the delay in filing of the appeal. The Ld. AR submitted that as the delay in filing of the present appeal had crept in because of the reasons beyond the control of the

5 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO assessee, therefore, the CIT(A) considering the totality of the facts ought to have condoned the same and disposed of the appeal on merits instead of dismissing the same on the ground of limitation. The Ld. AR submitted that the matter in all fairness be set-aside to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and dispose of the appeal qua the merits of the case.

6 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO the AO had summarily made the addition of the entire amount of expenses incurred by the assessee through credit cards as well as investment in the immovable property by treating them as having been sourced out of his unexplained money, ought to have in all fairness condoned the delay and disposed of the appeal on merits. Our aforesaid view that a liberal approach should be adopted while considering the application filed by an appellant seeking condonation of the delay is supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambikapur in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310- 26311/2024, dated 31st January, 2025. The Hon'ble Apex Court while setting aside the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, which had approved the declining of the condonation of the delay of 166 days by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, had observed, that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted while considering the application filed by an appellant seeking condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal.

7 ITA No.2084/Hyd/2025 Raghunath Setluri vs. ITO fairness and in the interest of justice requires to be restored to his file with a direction to readjudicate the case. Needless to say, the AO shall in the course of the set aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee who shall remain at liberty to substantiate his explanation regarding the source of the investment/expenditure based on fresh documentary evidence, if any.