PAPI REDDY ANKANNAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 1314/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 September 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)8 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside both the assessment and penalty orders to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication on merits, granting the assessee one more opportunity to furnish all necessary evidences and explanations. The Ld. AO is directed to provide an adequate opportunity of being heard and decide the issues as per law, with the assessee directed to cooperate without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

What were the facts?

The assessee, who did not file an income tax return for A.Y. 2020-21, had cash of Rs. 70 lakhs found during a police inspection, leading to a warrant under Section 132A and reopening of assessment under Section 147. The Ld. AO completed an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, making additions for short-term capital gains on sale of plots (Rs. 1,91,87,000/-) and securities (Rs. 30,91,342/-), and unexplained cash deposits under Section 68 (Rs. 15,44,215/-), determining a total income of Rs. 2,38,22,557/-. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, and a penalty of Rs. 90,000/- was also levied under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with statutory notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte additions made by the AO regarding capital gains from property and securities, and unexplained cash deposits, were justified without proper opportunity to the assessee; and whether the penalty imposed for non-compliance should be sustained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139,Section 132A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 68,Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

Hearing: 04/09/2025

PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: These appeals are filed by Shri Papi Reddy Ankannagari (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad-11 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), both dated 29.11.2024 respectively for the A.Y. 2020-21. Since these appeals are related to the same assessee and for the same A.Y. 2020-21, they are heard together and one consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity.

ITA Nos.1

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →