KALPANA VEERA REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 931/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: us: Grounds of Appeal 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order is erroneous in facts and law.1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had failed to consider the assessee's submissions and evidence regarding the source of cash deposits. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication with a direction to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee is aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 30,99,469/- on account of unexplained cash credits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee claims to have raised a gold loan which was routed to the bank account and subsequently withdrawn as cash, which was then deposited.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution without properly considering the evidence regarding the source of cash deposits, and whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Ms V. Koteswaramma, Sr. AR

आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. िनधा�रती/The Assessee : Kalpana Veera Reddy, E-Block, Flat No. 101, Aditya Empress Towers, Shaikpet Nala, Tolichowki, Golconda Post, Hyderabad, Telangana-500008. 2. राज�/ The Revenue : Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Signature Towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy. 37(P) of Kothaguda, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serilingampally (M), R.R. District, Hyderabad, Telangana-500084. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण /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 →