DHANALAXMI & COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD.

PER MANJUNATHA G. :

The above appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the Order dated 17.12.2024 of the learned CIT(A)-
National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC], Delhi, relating to the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. At the very outset, there is a delay of 22 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee had filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for not filing the appeal

2
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

within the prescribed time limit contending, inter alia, that, the tax consultant due to his family trip to New Zealand in the month of March could not prepare the appeal papers in time resulting in the delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. He, therefore, submitted that, since the circumstances are beyond it’s control and there was a ‘sufficient and reasonable cause’, the delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal may please be condoned in the interest of justice.
3. MS. Helen Ruby Jesindha, learned Sr. AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, did not strongly object to the reasons explained by the assessee.
4. We have heard both the parties and perused the affidavit filed by the assessee explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit before the Tribunal. We are satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee and, therefore, condone the delay of 22 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

4
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

However, there were no response from the side of the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has obtained the bank account statement of the assessee and after verification of the details and in absence of any supporting documents and return of income, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.16,82,307/- by best judgment vide order dated 19.03.2022 passed u/sec.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961. 6. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). Before the learned CIT(A) also, despite several notices issued u/sec.250
of the Act, the assessee neither appeared nor filed his submissions to substantiate it’s case. Therefore, the learned
CIT(A) has sustained the income determined by the Assessing Officer.
7. CA, K A Sai Prasad, Learned Counsel for the Assessee claims that, notices issued by the Assessing
Officer were not served upon the assessee because, the said notices were sent to the email ID which is not given by the 5
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

assessee either in the PAN data or in the return of income.
Further, during the appellate proceedings before the learned
CIT(A) are also ex-parte because, the assessee neither appeared nor furnished any details. Once again the assessee claims that, although, the assessee in Form-35
stated that, notice of hearing is required to be sent through post, but, not through email ID, but, the learned CIT(A) claims to have served notice through email ID given in Form-35, but the said notices are not served on the assessee. Therefore, the assessee could not file any evidence. Further, the Assessing Officer made addition towards cash deposits and cash withdrawals as business turnover and estimated profit, even though, the assessee claims that, it is engaged in the business of commission agent and only a reasonable amount of profit can be estimated towards commission. Since, the assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings are ex-parte and the assessee did not get proper opportunity of hearing before both the authorities. He, therefore, pleaded that, another opportunity of hearing may please be provided to the 6
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

assessee in the interest of justice by remitting the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A).

7
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

before the Assessing Officer or the learned CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings. Therefore, in absence of proper explanation along with documentary evidences, the learned CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Learned Counsel claims that, the said notices issued by the Department either during the course of assessment proceedings or during the course of appellate proceedings, are not received by the assessee and, therefore, the assessee could not file it’s submissions to substantiate it’s case. Therefore, learned Counsel for the Assessee pleaded that one more opportunity may please be provided by remitting the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) to substantiate it’s case. We find that, there is a bonafide reason for the assessee in not appearing before the lower authorities, in absence of notices received by it. Thus, the assessee was prevented opportunity of hearing to substantiate it’s case and thereby, principles of natural justice are not followed. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the issue needs to be set-aside to the file of learned CIT(A) to give another opportunity of hearing to the 8
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

assessee. 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 reconsider the issue, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall furnish relevant details in support of it’s claim as and when the case is posted for hearing. Further, we also direct the assessee to pay a nominal cost of Rs.5000/- [Rs. Five Thousand Only] for showing negligence or inaction before the Assessing Officer and the learned
CIT(A) and the said costs directed as above shall be paid to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund and produce relevant evidence to the Registry of the Tribunal within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.

[MANJUNATHA G]
VICE PRESIDENT

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Hyderabad, Dated 31st July, 2025

VBP

9
ITA.No.489/Hyd./2025

Copy to 1. Dhanalaxmi & Company, Hyderabad – 500 036
C/o. Katrapati & Associates, 1-1-298/2/B/3,
Sowbhagya Avenue Apts. 1st Floor, Ashok Nagar, Street
No.1, Hyderabad. Telangana.

//By Order//

////