Arjun Oruganti , Warangal v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Warangal

ITA 1154/Hyd/2019 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 115422514 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AAEPO8461F
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1154/Hyd/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Arjun Oruganti , Warangal
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Warangal
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB-A
Tribunal Order Date 22-03-2021
Date Of Final Hearing 17-02-2021
Next Hearing Date 17-02-2021
Last Hearing Date 15-02-2021
First Hearing Date 15-02-2021
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 17-07-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1154 & 1155/HYD./2019 A.Y. 2010 - 11 SRI ARJUN ORUGANTI VS. ITO WARD 5 WARANGAL WARANGAL [PAN: AAEPO8461F] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) F OR APPELLANT : SH. A.V. RAGHURAM ADV. FOR RESPONDENT : SH. SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 17/02/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 /03/2021 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI J.M. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY ASSESSEE FOR THE A.Y 2010 - 11 AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 3 HYDERABAD DATED 8.5.2019 CONFIRMING LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHORT THE ACT] . 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL ENTERED INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - CUM - GPA WITH M/S LAXMI CONSTRUCTIONS VIDE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO. 3817/2009 DATED 31.7.2009 ALONG WITH ANOTHER PERSON . THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE S SEE HAS NOT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ADMITTING INCOME DERIVED FROM THE SAID TRANSACTIONS AN D TH EREFORE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY ITA NOS. 1154 & 1155/HYD/19 AY 2010 - 11 SH. ARJUN ORUGANTI HYD. 2 WAY OF ISSU ANCE OF NOTICE U /S 148 OF THE ACT AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144/ 147 VIDE ORDER DATED 2 2.12.2017 DETERMINING TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.90 78 366/ - THEREAFTER NOTICE U/S 271(1)(B) WAS ISSUED TO ASSESSEE FOR NON - OFFERING THE INCOME TO TAX. HOWEVER NONE APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE AO LEVIED PENALTY OF RS. 10 000 / - FOR EACH DAY OF NON - COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE U/S 142 (1) I.E. TOTAL OF RS.20 000/ - PENALTY WAS LEVIED U/S 271(1)( B ) OF THE ACT. 2.1. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE APPEALED BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT AS NONE APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AS WELL HE DISMISSED ASSESSEES APPEAL. T HE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US BY RAISING THE FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS OF APPEAL . 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE COMMISSIONER (APP EALS) ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ORDER OF PENALTY PASSED BY THE AO U/S 271 (1)(B) OF THE ACT. 2. T HE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE CONTENTION OF THE APP ELLANT THAT THE NOTICES WERE NOT PROPERLY SERVED ON THE APPEL1ANT AND TH EREFORE THE PENALTY LEVIED OF RS.20 000 FOR TWO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS IS ILLEGAL AND INC ORRECT . 3. THE COMMISSION ER (A P PEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CALLED FOR THE RECORD AND VERIFIED OR HIMSELF ABOUT THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE APPEL1ANT RATHER THAN BLINDLY R E LY ING THE CONTENTS OF THE ASST. ORDER. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ANY OF THE GROUNDS THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OUGH T T O HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE APPEL1ANT IS AN UNEDUCATED PERSON AND DID NOT KN OW THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE NOTICES AL1EGEDLY ISSUED BY THE AO AND THEREFORE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN VISITED WITH PENALTY. (TAX EFFECT - RS.20 000 ) F OR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS T HAT MAY BE URGED IT IS PRAYED THAT THE APPEAL M AY BE ALLOWED. 2.2. LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT NOTICES U/S 142(1) WERE NOT SERVED ON ASSESSEE AND ALSO THAT EVEN IF IT IS TO ITA NOS. 1154 & 1155/HYD/19 AY 2010 - 11 SH. ARJUN ORUGANTI HYD. 3 BE PRESUMED THAT THE NOTICES WERE SERVED THE ASSESSEE BEING UNEDUCATED D ID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE TO COMPREHEND THE CONTENTS OF NOTICES. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THE APPEAL AGAINST ASSESSMENT ORDER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) IS PENDING WITH THE CIT(A). HE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THIS APPEAL ALSO MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). 2.3. LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. HAVING REGARD TO RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AND ALSO TO THE FACT THAT THE A PPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT IS PENDING BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED FOR NON - APPEARANCE AND NOT ON MERITS WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO FILE OF CIT(A) FOR DE - NO VO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 4. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL S ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22 ND MARCH 202 1 . SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 22 ND MARCH 202 1 . *GMV COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SH. ARJUN ORUGANTI C/O SRI AV RAGHURAM ADVOCATE FLAT NO.610 6 TH FLOOR BABUKHAN ESTATE BASHEERBAGH HYDERABAD 500 001 2. ITO WARD 5 WARANGAL 3. ACIT WARANGAL RANGE WARA N GAL . 4. CIT(A) - 3 HYDERABAD 6. PR.CIT - 3 HYDERABAD 7. DR ITAT HYDERABAD. 8. GUARD FILE.