MANDALA SRIRAMACHANDRA MURTHY,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VIJAYAWADA
Facts
The assessee did not file an Income Tax Return for AY 2015-16, despite having significant cash deposits (Rs. 56,10,400/-) flagged by the CBDT. The AO framed an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, adding the entire amount under Section 69A. The assessee's subsequent appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 120 days, which the CIT(A) refused to condone.
Held
The Tribunal noted that notices were not properly delivered to the assessee due to a blank recipient ID in emails and that the assessee was not aware of the proceedings. Concluding that the assessee deserved an opportunity, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the case to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee to substantiate the cash deposits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal when assessment notices were not properly delivered to the assessee, and whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate cash deposits.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 69A, 148A(b), 148A(d), 148, 142(1), 133(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/The : Mandala Sriramachandra Murthy, Flat No.401, Plot No.784 & 785, Sri Sai Saudha Assessee Apartments, Matrusree Nagar, Miyapur, Hyderabad 2. रधजस्व/ : The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), The Income Tax Office, CR Buildings, 1st Floor, Revenue Annex, MG Road, Vijayawada 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam 4. नवभधगीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण / DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file
आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam.