Ravi Kumar Kandala Vs ITO (Telangana High Court)
In this case before the Telangana High Court, the appellant challenged an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, which had dismissed his appeal as barred by limitation. The appeal before the High Court was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the Tribunal’s order dated 10.06.2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12.
The Assessing Officer had passed an assessment order under Section 143(1) on 31.03.2014 raising a net demand of Rs. 10,43,210. The appellant filed a statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with a delay of 142 days, which was condoned. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) later dismissed the appeal on 06.01.2017 after there was no representation on behalf of the appellant despite repeated opportunities.
Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal on 25.02.2025 with a delay of 2913 days. Along with the appeal, a condonation petition seeking condonation of the delay was also filed. The Tribunal rejected the condonation petition and consequently dismissed the appeal as time-barred.
Before the High Court, the appellant contended that there was no effective service of notice by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It was argued that after filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), no notices were issued to the consultant whose address had been specifically provided for service of notices. According to the appellant, the notices were instead sent to his old residential address, which he had vacated after the death of his father. As a result, neither the appellant nor the consultant received effective notice regarding the appeal proceedings.
