GOPAL RAYAPANENI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the issue to the file of the AO. The assessee was granted a fresh opportunity to present their case on merits after being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to file an Income Tax Return for AY 2013-14, leading to assessment proceedings under Section 147. Despite notices, the assessee remained non-responsive, and the assessment was completed ex-parte. The CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal due to non-appearance.
What were the issues?
Whether the revenue authorities provided sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present their case, and if a fresh opportunity should be granted for a decision on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Gopal Rayapaneni (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 18.09.2024 for the A.Y. 2013-14.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee did not file any Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2013-14. The case of the assessee was opened u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 was issued to the assessee. However, the assessee neither filed any Income Tax Return nor responded to the notices issued during the assessment proceedings. Finally, the Ld. AO completed the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 31.03.2022 with a total income of Rs.2,15,84,069/-. Before the Ld. CIT(A) also the assessee remained non respondent to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). 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, contending that both the Revenue Authorities did not provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee to submit their explanations/evidence in support of the additions made by the Ld. AO. It is further contended that both the Revenue Authorities have passed the order without providing proper opportunity. 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 prosecute his case before both the Revenue Authorities. 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 Revenue authorities and submitted that, sufficient opportunity has already been given by the Revenue 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 by either side. It could be seen from the orders of both the Revenue Authorities that in spite of many opportunities given, the assessee failed to prosecute his case on merits. It is a fact that the assessee does not stand to gain by not producing the necessary information/documents and prosecute his case on merits. Be that as it may, now the assessee is ready to produce all information/documents 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, we are of the view that fresh opportunity should be given to the assessee and, accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Ld. AO for passing a fresh order on merits after affording the opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Grounds of appeal are answered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026