INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NORTH ANDHRA UTILITIES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD
आआआआ आआआआआआ आआआआआआ, आआआआआआआआ आआआ
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad
BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आ.आआआ.आआ /ITA Nos.1012 & 1013/Hyd/2024
(आआआआआआआआ आआआआ/Assessment Year:2018-19)
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-16(1), Hyderabad.
Vs.
M/s. North Andhra
Utilities Pvt. Ltd.,
Hyderabad.
PAN:AAECK0781H
(Appellant)
(Respondent)
आआआआआआआआआआ
आआआआआआ/Assessee by:
Shri Ved Jain, Advocate
आआआआआआ आआआआआआ/Revenue by::
Shri K. Ravi Kiran, CIT-DR
आआआआआआ आआ आआआआआ/Date of hearing:
30/01/2025
आआआआआ आआ
आआआआआ/Pronouncement:
14/02/2025
आआआआ/ORDER
PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M:
These two appeals are filed by M/s. North Andhra Utilities Pvt. Ltd. (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre
(NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), both dated 23.08.2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19. Since both the appeals are inter-related, they are being heard together and a consolidated order is being passed, for the sake of convenience and brevity.
2. At the outset, the Learned Department Representative (“Ld. DR”) submitted that, the assessee did not make any compliance to the notices
ITA Nos.1012 & 1013/Hyd/2024 2
issued by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) during the appellate proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). Consequently, the Ld. AO completed the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 144B on 23.06.2021
making addition of Rs.13.60 Crores u/s.68 of the Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of the document filed by the assessee, for the first time before him, without calling for any remand report from the Ld. AO, deleted the said addition ofRs.13.60 Crores. Hence, the Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has violated the provisions of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be set aside and the issue shall be remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication.
Per contra, the Ld. AR submitted that, the assessee had not filed any application under Rule 46A of the Rules before the Ld. CIT(A). These documents which have been filed before the Ld. CIT(A) were submitted at the direction of Ld. CIT(A). Hence, there is no violation of Rule 46A in the case under consideration. Further, the Ld. AR relying on the decision of CIT Vs. Anupam Fashion Palace 42 CTR 147 dated 17.05.1984, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has co-terminous power under section 250(4) of the Act, to call for any new document and adjudicature on the same. Accordingly, there is no violation has been done by the Ld. CIT(A) as far as the provisions of Rule 46A is concerned. Finally, the Ld. AR prayed before the bench to uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and also gone through the record in the light of the submissions made by either side. There is no dispute about the ITA Nos.1012 & 1013/Hyd/2024 3
fact that the assessee had not complied with the notice issued and did not file any piece of document before the Ld. AO. The assessment of the assessee was completed by the Ld. AO u/s.144 of the Act. Hence, there was no occasion for the Ld. AO to verify any document with regard to the case of the assessee. The documents which were filed before the Ld. AO were produced for the first time only. Therefore, in our opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) was duty bound under Rule 46A to call for a remand report from the Ld. AO which the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to do so. As far as, the reliance of the assessee on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi
5. The appeal in ITA No.1013/Hyd/2024 relates to the levy of penalty u/s.
271AAC of the Act by the Ld. AO on the addition made by the Ld. AO in appeal
No.1012/Hyd/2024. We have set aside the quantum appeal in ITA
No.1012/Hyd/2024, to the file of Ld. AO, accordingly, the penalty appeal in 1013/Hyd/2024 is also liable to be set aside to the file of Ld. AO for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, we set aside the issue to the file of Ld. AO for fresh adjudication.
6. In the result, the appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.
7. To sum up, both the appeals of revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.
ITA Nos.1012 & 1013/Hyd/2024 4
Order pronounced in the open Court on 14th Feb., 2025. (K. NARASIMHA CHARY)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad.
Dated: 14.02.2025. * Reddy gp
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
M/s. North Andhra Utilities Pvt. Ltd., 7-1-24, B Block, 1st Floor, Roxana Towers, Greenlands, Begumpet, Hyderabad- 500 016 2. ITO, Ward 16(1), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard file.
BY ORDER,