REJINTHAL MURLIDHAR,MEDAK vs. ITO., WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 811/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 August 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT ruled that an Appellate Authority is obligated to decide an appeal on its merits, even if the appellant fails to appear. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte dismissal for non-prosecution and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the assessee due opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file an income tax return for AY 2016-17. The Assessing Officer initiated re-assessment proceedings under Section 148 based on information of significant immovable property purchases and cash/time deposits. An ex-parte assessment was completed, adding Rs. 38,76,000/- for cash deposits and rental income. The CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution, without addressing the merits of the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without considering the merits of the case based on available records.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD “SMC-B” BENCH: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G

Hearing: 07.08.2025Pronounced: 13.08.2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “SMC-B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.811/Hyd./2025 Assessment Year 2016-2017 Sri Rejinthal Muralidhar, The Income Tax Officer, Kaveli Village & Post, Ward-1, Medak District. vs. SANGAREDDY – 502 001. PIN – 502 321. Telangana. Telangana. PAN BREPM7734B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Sri Vinodh Kannan, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.08.2025 ORDER 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 2. 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.

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 13.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 148A(b)

All 524 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →