PULLA RAO PERUGU,PRAKASAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ONGOLE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1035/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 October 2025AY 2017-188 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 461 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2017-18. The Tribunal reasoned that the assessee's death occurred shortly after the issuance of the Section 148 notice, and the family's lack of awareness of the proceedings due to sudden death constituted a 'sufficient cause' for the delay. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. Furthermore, since the assessment proceedings before the AO were ex parte due to the assessee's death and the legal heir lacked a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on merits, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the issue back to the AO for reconsideration after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the legal heir. Regarding the penalty under Section 271AAC(1), the Tribunal noted that since the appeal on the primary addition was set aside to the AO for reconsideration, the penalty on the same addition could not survive at this stage. Therefore, the penalty order was also set aside and restored to the AO for reconsideration after the reassessment proceedings are completed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Pullarao Perugu, did not file an income tax return for Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment under Section 147, citing escaped income due to cash deposits of Rs. 1,49,87,400/- in a current account. A notice under Section 148 was issued on March 28, 2021. The assessee did not respond, leading to notices under Section 142(1) and subsequently a best judgment assessment under Section 144. The AO completed the assessment on March 29, 2022, determining income at Rs. 1,49,87,400/-. The assessee expired on May 19, 2021. The legal heir filed an appeal before the CIT(A) on August 3, 2023, with a delay of 461 days, citing the death of the assessee and family distress. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for not condoning the delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 461 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2017-18, relating to reassessment proceedings under Section 147, should be condoned, turning on the interpretation of 'sufficient cause' under Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) for Assessment Year 2017-18, related to additions under Section 69A, should be sustained when the primary assessment order is being set aside. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to the death of the assessee and the resulting mental disturbance of the family. The assessee also contended that since the notice under Section 148 was issued after the assessee's death, the assessment proceedings were ex parte and the legal heir did not get a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee sought a remand to the AO for reconsideration. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through its Senior AR, fairly agreed that the matter could be remitted to the file of the AO for reconsideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 271AAC(1),Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 249(3),Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad

For Respondent: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A, Shri Krishna Moorthy K
Pronounced: 27.10.2025

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Pullarao Perugu, 11-82-2, Kolukula Road, Yeeragondapalem, Prakasam District – 523327, Andhra Pradesh. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →