GANDHI PEDAPUDI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an agriculturist, filed his Return of Income (“ROI”) for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 20.06.2017 declaring total income at Rs.3,42,790/- besides agricultural income of Rs.10,24,300/. The assessment of the assessee was completed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 30.12.2019 by accepting the ROI. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s.147 of the Act to verify the agriculture income of Rs.10,24,300/-. The Ld. AO completed the ITA No.65/Hyd/2025 5

Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not prosecute his case on merits. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Feeling aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that, as explained in the condonation petition for delay in filing the appeal before ITAT, the assessee did not come to know about the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore the assessee could not prosecute his case on merits before the CIT(A). The Ld. AR further submitted that, the assessee does not stand to gain by allowing the appeal to be disposed of without any documentary evidence being produced and it is only due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, the assessee could not produce the necessary documents/evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) to prosecute his case. By consolidating all the grounds, he further submitted that, given an opportunity, the assessee is now ready to produce all such details and conduct the proceedings diligently and get the matter disposed of on merits.

Per contra, Ld. DR placed heavy reliance on the orders of the authorities below, and submitted that sufficient opportunity has already been given by the authorities, but the assessee failed to avail the same. He opposed the grant of further opportunity to the assessee.

We have heard the rival contentions and also gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. It could be seen from the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee failed to substantiate his case by providing necessary documentary evidence, which resulted in passing the orders without consideration thereof. However as submitted by the Ld. AR, non prosecution on the part of the assessee was only due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee. Further, it is a fact that the assessee does not stand to gain by not producing such documents. Be that as it may, now the assessee is ready to produce all such documentary evidence in support of their contentions and get the matter disposed of on merits. The highest that would happen by allowing an opportunity to the assessee is that a cause would be decided on merits. With this view of the matter and considering the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that fresh opportunity should be given to the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for passing a fresh order on merits after affording the opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Grounds of appeal are answered accordingly. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 14th Feb., 2025. (VIJAY PAL RAO) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Gandhi Pedapudi, F.No.76, Kranthi Sikhara Apartments, Punjagutta, Hyderabad-500082 2. ITO, Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. 3. Pr. CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard File.