REJINTHAL MURLIDHAR,MEDAK vs. ITO., WARD-1, SANGAREDDY
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD “SMC-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 11.03.2025 of the learned
Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-National Faceless
Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC], Delhi, relating to the assessment year 2016-2017. 2
ITA.No.811/Hyd./2025
None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking for adjournment. We, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal on merits, after hearing the Learned Sr. AR for the Revenue.
Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year 2016-2017. As per the information available with the Department, the assessee had purchased immovable property amounting to Rs.15,75,000/- and cash deposit of Rs.30,30,500/- and Rs.17,00,000/- and time deposit of Rs.12,50,000/- during the financial year 2015-2016 relevant to assessment year 2016-2017. Since the assessee had not filed his return of income, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment amounting to Rs.75,55,500/- and issued show cause notice u/sec.148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and called-upon the assessee to file certain details. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/sec.148 of the Act on 29.03.2023 and various notices u/sec.143(2) and 142(1) and final show
3
ITA.No.811/Hyd./2025
cause notice dated 06.02.2024. In response, the assessee has furnished certain details, but, failed to file complete details as called-for by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Assessing
Officer passed ex-parte assessment order u/sec.147 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order dated 27.02.2024 and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.38,76,000/-, by making additions towards cash deposits into bank account u/sec.69A of the Act and also additions towards rent from agricultural land for putting-up mobile tower to M/s. GTL Infrastructure for Rs.66,000/-. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee ex-parte for non- prosecution. Further, not decided the issues involved in appeal filed by the assessee on merits.
We have heard Learned Sr. AR, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. It is well settled principle of law that, even in a case of non-prosecution by the appellant, the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal on merits on the basis
4
ITA.No.811/Hyd./2025
of material available on record. Since the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non- prosecution without considering the issues on merits, in our considered view, the matter needs to go back 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) for reconsideration. The learned CIT(A) is directed to reconsider the issue, after providing one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the learned CIT(A) and file relevant details as and when the case is posted for hearing.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 13.08.2025. [VIJAY PAL RAO]
[MANJUNATHA G]
VICE PRESIDENT
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated 13th August, 2025
VBP
5
ITA.No.811/Hyd./2025
Copy to 1. Sri Rejinthal Muralidhar, H.No.1-36, Kaveli Village &
Post, Kohir Mandal, Medak District. PIN – 502 321. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, SANGAREDDY.
PIN – 502 001. Telangana.
3. The Pr. CIT, Hyderabad
4. The DR ITAT “SMC-B” Bench, Hyderabad.
5. Guard File.
//By Order//
////