CHANDRA MOHAN REDDY VENNAPUSA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 875/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 November 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI MANJUNATHA .G, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER, SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following a coordinate bench's decision, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The issue is restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration of the assessee's evidence regarding credit card payments.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 involves identical facts to previous appeals for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17. The issue pertains to explaining credit card payments.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee has provided sufficient evidence to explain credit card payments. The need for de novo consideration of evidence by the Assessing Officer.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI MANJUNATHA .G, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY

For Respondent: Shri Suresh Babu KN, Sr. AR
Hearing: 04/11/2024

आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 17/04/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Chandra Mohan Reddy Vennapusa (“the assessee”), assessee preferred this appeal. 2. At the outset, the learned Authorized Representative (“learned AR”) submitted that the facts involved in this matter are identical to the facts involved in the assessee’s own case for the AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17 in to 577/Hyd/2024 and by order dated 19/08/2024 the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal has set-aside the order of the learned CIT(A) and restored the issues to the file of the learned AO for fresh consideration of the relevant evidence filed by the assessee to explain the Credit Card payments and decide the issue de novo in accordance with law. The learned AR submitted that since this case is also a part of the batch of appeals and facts are identical, a similar course may be followed in this case also. The Ld. Departmental Representative (“learned DR”) reports no objection and the same is recorded.

3.

On a perusal of the facts of this case and the facts involved in to 577/Hyd/2024 (supra), we find that the facts are identical and the findings are applicable to this appeal also on all fours. Therefore, respectfully following the view taken by the Coordinate Bench in to 577/Hyd/2024 (supra), we set-aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the learned AO for fresh consideration of the relevant evidence filed by the assessee to explain the Credit Card payments and to decide the issue de novo in accordance with law. Grounds are answered accordingly.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 21st day of November, 2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →