SADHU RAMA KRISHNAREDDY,NALGONDA vs. ITO., WARD-1, SURYAPET

PDF · subscribers
ITA 833/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 October 2025AY 2017-18Bench: us: 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erroneous both on facts and in law. is 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) is not justified in deciding the appeal ex parte without providing any opportunity and without issuing any notices.3. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) is not justified in not considering the grounds raised by the appellant in the appeal filed 4. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) considered the irrelevan1 pages
AI SummarySet Aside

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had erred by dismissing the appeal based on facts and grounds not related to the assessee, constituting a miscarriage of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2017-18. The AO selected the case for scrutiny and made additions for unexplained cash deposits and estimated business income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly adjudicated the appeal when the order was based on irrelevant facts and grounds, leading to a dismissal without proper consideration of the assessee's case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 10(23C)(iii)(ab),Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad

आदेशक���त�ल�पअ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. �नधा�रती/The : Sadhu Rama Krishnareddy, Venkepalli Village, Noothankal Mandal, Nalgonda, Assessee Telangana. 2. राज�व/ : Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Suryapet, The Telangana. Revenue 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील�यअ�धकरण /DR,ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गाड�फ़ाईल / Guard file

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →