PADMAVATHI GUTTA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) had issued several notices to the assessee and in absence of any meaningful/worthwhile explanation from the side of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer, without deciding the appeal on merits.

Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal.

During the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the impugned notice issued sec.148 dated 26.05.2022 was issued/emailed in the name of her husband who was reached to his heavenly abode and 6 ITA.Nos.1349/Hyd./2024 & ITA.No.82/Hyd./2025 in that trauma she could not substantiate her claims before the authorities below. It was the submission of the assessee that the Assessing Officer passed assessment order in the case of her late husband Gutta Jagan Mohan Reddy for the same property and the capital gains worked-out on all three owners at Rs.1,45,77,638/- and that assessee’s share of long term capital gains in proportion to her share was at Rs.34,65,126/- out of the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of long term capital gains in the hands of the assessee at Rs.97,55,884/- and also ignored the construction cost for 13271 sft. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee, in view of the above factual position, pleaded that providing an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate her case before the learned CIT(A), the assessee is ready to furnish all the documents as called for by the learned CIT(A). He accordingly pleaded that the matter in issue may please be remitted back to the file of learned CIT(A)/AO in the interest of justice.

We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that first the impugned notice u/sec.148 dated 26.05.2022 was issued in favour of the assessee’s husband which is borne-out from the assessment order. It is a fact that the assessee was reached to heavenly abode. Admittedly, while making the impugned addition of Rs.97,55,884/- on account of long term capital gains, the Assessing Officer failed to note the proportion/share of the 8 ITA.Nos.1349/Hyd./2024 & ITA.No.82/Hyd./2025 property in the hands of the assessee when the immovable property was sold by the assessee along with two others as noted by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order. When the matter carried in appeal before the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-explanation from the side of the assessee to substantiate her claim without deciding the appeal on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act, according to which, the learned CIT(A) has to give reasons for decision and adjudication thereof, even if the assessee did not appear before him. We find that since the Learned Counsel for the Assessee requested to remit the matter in issue back to the file learned CIT(A), taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we remit the matter in issue back to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to re- decide the case of the assessee afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, it is the sole risk and responsibility of the assessee to plead and prove her case in consequential

For the same assessment year 2014-2015 in the case of Jagan Mohan Reddy Gutta [ITA.No.82/Hyd./2025] the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.9,25,890/- as against the returned income of Rs.2,69,710/- vide order dated 31.12.2018 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. And in appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer in absence of explanation offered by the assessee to justify his claim, without deciding the appeal on merits.

Same order to follow in ITA.No.82/Hyd./2025 for the assessment year 2014-2015 in the case of Guutta Jagan Mohan Reddy who is husband of the assessee Smt. Gutta Padmavathi in ITA.No.1349/Hyd.2024 for the assessment year 2014-2015.