INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BENGALURU vs. SREENATH MURUGESH ADIMOOLAM, BENGALURU

In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: -

Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, we find that on the basis of the information available on the Risk Management Strategy formulated by the CBDT, it was observed that the assessee received salary income totaling Rs. 28,59,361 from SAP Labs India Pvt Ltd and Dataformix Technologies Pvt Ltd. However, the assessee did not file his return of income for the year under consideration. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 09/02/2024 after completion of the procedure laid down in section 148A of the Act. In response to the said notice, the assessee did not file his return of income. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) vide order dated 06/02/2025 passed under section 147 read with section 144 read with section 144B of the Act concluded that the total salary of Rs. 28,59,361 is the undisclosed salary income of the assessee and added the same to the total income of the assessee. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, allowed the appeal of the assessee on the jurisdictional issue that since the notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued by the Jurisdictional AO instead of the Faceless AO, the same is void ab initio, being contrary to the provisions of the Act. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us.

From the perusal of the record, it is evident that the AO made the total addition only amounting to Rs. 28,59,361, being the salary received by the assessee from SAP Labs India Pvt Ltd and Dataformix Technologies Pvt Ltd. by considering the same as undisclosed income, since the assessee did not file his return of income. Thus, the addition in dispute is only Rs. 3 28,59,361. Accordingly, the tax effect involved in the present appeal cannot be in any case more than the disputed addition, i.e. Rs. 28,59,361, which is below the monetary limit of Rs.60 lakh, applicable to appeals before the Tribunal, as per CBDT Circular no.9 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid, Revenue’s appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, the Revenue is granted the liberty to seek recall of this order if, at a later point in time, it is found that the appeal falls under any of the exceptions provided in the Circular referred to above.

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed.