ARYAVYSYA SEVA SANGHAM PATTANA,WARANGAL vs. ITO, WARD - 1, WARANGAL

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of any submissions and supporting details while passing the impugned order. He has pointed out that in response to the notice dated 08.12.2025 the assessee has filed the written submissions on 12.12.2025 within the compliance date. He has referred to the acknowledgment of filing reply placed at Page no.1 of the paper book and the written submissions and other details placed at Page no.2 to 44 of the paper book. However, the learned CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without considering these replies filed by the assessee. The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has thus submitted that the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) may be set aside, and the matter may be remanded to the record of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal of the assessee after considering the written submissions and other documentary evidence filed by the assessee.

On the other hand, the learned DR raised no objection if the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after considering the reply/written submissions filed by the assessee.

We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the impugned order of the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has issued three notices to the assessee and the last notice was issued on 08.12.2025 and thereafter, the impugned order was passed by the learned CIT(A) by recording the reasons that the assessee did not file any written submissions and did not comply with the notice issued by the learned CIT(A). Thus, the appeal of the assessee dismissed summarily due to non-prosecution/filing the compliance of the notice issued by it. These reasons and grounds of dismissal of appeal by the learned CIT(A) are contrary to the facts on record as the assessee has duly replied to the notice dated 08.12.2025 by filing the written submissions along with documentary evidence vide acknowledgment dated 12.12.2025 and the same is placed at Page no.1 of the paper book. The written submissions and other documentary evidence which also annexed to the said acknowledgment and placed at page nos.2 to 44 of the paper book. Thus, it is clear that when the assessee has filed reply/written submissions along with documentary evidence well within the date of compliance of notice dated 08.12.2025 then, passing the impugned order without considering the said reply and documentary evidences is contrary to the facts as well as record. It is also pertinent to note that the impugned order was passed by the learned CIT(A) on 30.01.2026 whereas the assessee filed the written submissions and other documentary evidence on 12.12.2025. Thus, there was sufficient time with the learned CIT(A) to consider the reply and other documents filed by the assessee. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal of the assessee on merits after considering the reply/ written submissions as well as other documentary evidences filed by the assessee. The assessee is also at liberty to file further details and evidence before the learned CIT(A) in support of its claim. Needless to say, the learned CIT(A) is directed to provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing the fresh order.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.