SRIDHAR MARAMREDDY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 504/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 October 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had not dealt with all the issues as per the grounds of appeal and had not considered the assessee's submissions. Therefore, the appeal was remanded to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, filed an e-return for AY 2017-18 declaring income of Rs.7,12,190 and agricultural income of Rs.4,17,300. The case was selected for scrutiny due to cash deposits of Rs.25,50,000. The Assessing Officer made an addition on cash deposits, assessing the total income at Rs.32,62,190.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the grounds of appeal and considered the assessee's submissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

(निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Sridhar Maramreddy, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward 8(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN:BQHPM4916K (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of 07/10/2025 hearing: घोर्णध की 09/10/2025 तधरीख/Pronouncement: आदेश/ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 27.01.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his e-return for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 16.12.2017 declaring total income of Rs.7,12,190/- and agricultural income of Rs.4,17,300/-.

The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS, notice was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee to furnish details regarding cash deposits to the tune of Rs.25,50,000/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment as the explanation submitted by the assessee was not properly explained, in support of sources of cash deposit after making addition on cash deposits, income of the assessee assessed at Rs.32,62,190/-.

3.

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed after considering the submissions made before him as not maintainable.

4.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that one more opportunity be provided to present his case once again before the Ld. CIT(A) with documentary evidences. The Ld. DR supported the orders of authorities below.

5.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. On going through the order of Ld. CIT(A), I am of the considered opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) had not dealt all the issues as per the grounds of appeal of the assessee, not adverted to submissions of assessee. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh de novo adjudication after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It is ordered accordingly.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 9th Oct., 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →