GUNJA SRINIVASA RAO,VISSANNAPET vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA

All the three appeals filed by the assessee are related to the same assessment year. ITA No.775/VIZ/2026 is relating to the quantum of appeal and other two appeals being ITA No.776/VIZ/2026 and ITA No. 777/VIZ/2026 are penalty proceedings drawn against the assessee. Since issues involved are common and relating to the same party and for the same assessment year, therefore all three appeals are heard together and passed this common order, for the sake of convenience.

First, we take up appeal in ITA No. 775/VIZ/2026 (A.Y.2020-21) quantum of appeal and findings of this appeal will apply mutatis mutandis to the other connected appeals being ITA No. 776/VIZ/2026 & ITA No.777/VIZ/2026 respectively.

Brief facts of the case are that, Assessee is an individual and did not file return of income for the assessment year in question. During the year under consideration, Assessee deposited huge cash amounting to Rs.1,07,88,700/- in his bank account maintained with Sapthagiri Grameena Bank. Accordingly, assessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter in short “the Act”] and notice under section 148 of the Act, was issued on 28.02.2024. In response to the same, Assessee did not file his return of income. Consequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the Assessee through mail as well as speed post. However, Assessee did not comply to the notice issued to him. Further, Assessee did not respond to the show cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings by adding the cash deposits made during the year under consideration of Rs.1,07,88,700/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act and assessed the income u/s. 115BBE of the Act vide assessment order dated 09.01.2025.

Aggrieved by the above order, Assessee went in appeal before Ld. CIT(A), where the appeal of the Assessee was dismissed by sustaining the order of the assessing officer. The contention of the Ld. CIT(A) was that, the appeal of the Assessee was filed belatedly and after 240 days of passing of the assessment order. Therefore, the condonation application filed by the Assessee was not considered and dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in-limine.

Still aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

At the time of hearing, the Learned Authorized Representative fairly stated that both the orders of the authorities below are exparte orders, as Assessee could not participate in the proceedings, therefore, orders were passed ex prate against the Assessee. Ld.AR prayed that, if another chance has given to the assessee, then Assessee is ready to file his necessary supporting documents before the authorities below in order to substantiate its claim.

On the other hand, Learned Departmental Representative supported the decision of the authorities below. He stated that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay, since Assessee could not file reasonable cause for such delay. Therefore, he supported the order of the authorities below.

We, after hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that in the present case of the Assessee, both the orders of the authorities below are exparte orders and Assessee could not substantiate the claim properly before the authorities below. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we remit back the entire issue to the file of assessing officer with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee. Assessee is also directed to comply to the notices issued by the assessing officer during the remand proceedings. In terms of the above, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The remaining appeals are relating to the penalty proceedings, being ITA No. 776/VIZ/2026 (A.Y. 2020-21) & ITA No. 777/VIZ/2026 (A.Y. 2020-21), since the quantum of appeal is set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer, the penalty proceedings cannot be independently stands. Therefore, these appeals are also set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer. If it is necessary, Assessing Officer shall pass appropriate orders in the penalty proceedings having regard to the outcome of the quantum proceedings. In terms of the above, all these appeals are set aside to the file of Assessing Officer for the statistical purposes.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.