TRIKKUR VARADARAJAN SREENIVASAN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G
PER MANJUNATHA G. :
The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against the Order dated 24.03.2025 of the learned
Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-National Faceless
Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”], Delhi, relating to the assessment year 2021-2022. 2
ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 10.01.2023 declaring income of Rs.68,79,050/-. The case of the assessee has been selected for scrutiny under CASS on the basis of verification the genuineness of transactions uploaded through VRU. The VRU i.e., DDIT Investigation, Unit 4(2), Chennai had received an intelligence regarding foreign transactions in the case of assessee on the ground that he had opened crypto wallet with the exchangers names Kraken and Kritomat and transferred from his wallet to wallet that was allegedly used fraudulently. Based on the above information enquiry was conducted and it was found that credits of bitcoins (15.4755) amounting to Rs.1,96,41,385/-was received during the year 2020-21. During investigation, the assessee was asked to identify the persons from whom such receipts in his Bittrex wallet has been received, the ledger statement of Bittrex account and the computation how assessee is showing income in his revised return. The assessee had submitted that, these were the borrowed funds, which were received through Bittrex
3
ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
from his friends abroad and, therefore, assessee was asked to identify the persons from whom credits were received in Bittrex account and to establish the genuineness of the transaction. However, assessee did not provide any such details despite being issued multiple summons by the investigation wing. In light of the above facts, the DDIT investigation, Chennai found that receipts/credits in the Bittrex wallet of the assessee remain unexplained. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has issued 5 notices u/sec.142(1) of the Income Tax Act,
1961
dated
01.06.2023,
16.06.2023,
10.07.2023,
25.07.2023 and 08.08.2023 which duly served upon the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer has also issued show cause notice dated 21.09.2023. Since, there were no proper explanation from the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition in respect of variation of unexplained cash credits amounting to Rs.1,96,41,385/- u/sec.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, addition on account of disallowance of deduction of HRA amounting to Rs.3,84,000/- and variation on account of income from business or profession
4
ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
amounting to (-) Rs.15,71,311/- and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.2,53,33,124/- vide order dated
31.01.2024 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s144B of the Income
Tax Act, 1961. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A). Before the learned CIT(A) on 4 occasions i.e., on 12.09.2024,
05.11.2024, 21.11.2024 and 17.02.2025 the learned CIT(A) has issued notices u/sec.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
fixing the case for hearing. But, there were no response from the assessee. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution, however, not discussed the issue on merits.
Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now, in appeal before the Tribunal.
MS. Jyothi Anumolu, Advocate-Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without deciding the issue on merits. She submitted that, it 5 ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
is settled position of law, the learned CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merits, even if, the assessee did not appear before him. She, therefore, pleaded that, one more opportunity may please be given to the assessee by remitting the matter to the file of learned CIT(A) in the interest of justice.
Dr. Sachin Kumar, learned Sr. AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting the order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that, the assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer or the learned CIT(A) despite several notices were issued to him which is evident from the orders of the authorities below. Therefore, in absence of proper representation from the side of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution. He, therefore, submitted that, the order of the learned CIT(A) is in accordance with law and pleaded that the order of the learned CIT(A) should be upheld.
We have heard both the parties, perused the material on record and the orders of the authorities below.
6
ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
We find that, it is the settled position of law by the decisions of various Courts and Tribunals that, even in a case of no representation from the appellant, the appeal should be decided on merits on the basis of material available on record. In the present case, although, the assessee has furnished certain details before the Assessing Officer in respect of additions made towards unexplained cash credits u/sec.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but, the learned
CIT(A) not even considered the said information while disposing of the appeal. Since the learned CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal filed by the assessee for non- prosecution, without considering the issue on merit, in our considered view, the issue needs to be set-aside to the file of learned CIT(A). Thus, we set-aside the order of the learned
CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issues involved in the appeal of the assessee, in accordance with law, by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
7
ITA.No.786/Hyd./2025
Order pronounced in the open Court on 04.09.2025. [VIJAY PAL RAO]
[MANJUNATHA G]
VICE PRESIDENT
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated 04th September, 2025
VBP
Copy to 1. Trikkur
Varadarajan
Sreenivasan,
308,
Solitaire
Banjara Road No.10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.
PIN – 500 034. Telangana.
The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(1), I.T. Towers, Professor Elyas Burney Rd, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad – 500 004. Telangana. 3. The Pr. CIT, Hyderabad. 4. The DR ITAT “B” Bench, Hyderabad. 5. Guard File.
//By Order//
////