DURGA KUMARI MOHAMMAD,AKIVIDU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHIMAVARAM

Since the issues raised in both these appeals are identical, therefore, for the sake of convenience, these appeals are clubbed, heard and disposed off by this consolidated order. We are taking Appeal in ITA.No. 301/VIZ/2024 for Assessment Year 2015-16 as a lead appeal.

Briefly stated facts of the case are that, assessee is a home maker and a partner in the partnership firm entitled M/s. Subham Developers. Assessee has not filed return of income for the A.Y.2015-16. Assessing Officer received information from the ADIT(Inv), Unit-IIII(4), Rajamahedravaram, that the assessee had made investments in a firm M/s. Subham Developers and she had also received income from the firm in the F.Y. 2014-15, however the assessee has not filed the Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2015-16. Consequently, Assessing Officer reopened the assessment after recording reasons for reopening. Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2020 was issued and duly served on the assessee and asked to file the return of income for the A.Y.2015-16. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were also issued to the assessee from time to time seeking relevant information/documents. However, assessee could not file any reply for the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment under section 147 r.w.s.

On being aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee even after receipt of the hearing notices on various dates did not file any supporting documents on her contentions as per the grounds of appeal raised by her. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) disposed off this appeal based on the merits available on record.

On being aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before us and raised following grounds of appeal: -

On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld. DR”] relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that assessee has not utilized the opportunity provided by Assessing Officer as well as Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is exparte order and she pleaded to confirm the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. On a perusal of the assessment order and Ld.CIT(A) order, we find that even though the Assessing Officer and Ld.CIT(A) provided opportunity on several occasions, assessee could not appear nor complied to the notices issued. Considering submissions of the Ld.AR and totality of facts and keeping in view the additions / disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in order to meet the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration and the assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and in turn Ld. CIT(A) call for remand report, if necessary, and dispose off the case on Page No. 4 & 302/VIZ/2024 DURGA KUMARI MOHAMMAD merits. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Coming to the appeal relating to A.Y. 2016-17, since facts in this case are mutatis mutandis, therefore the decision taken in for the A.Y.2015-16 is applicable to this assessment year also. Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

To sum-up, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th September, 2024.