आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (cid:302)ी मंजुनाथ जी, लेखा सदè य एव ं (cid:302)ी र(cid:874)वश सूद, Ûया(cid:467)यक सदèय के सम¢ ।

Before Shri Manjunatha G. Accountant Member And Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1966/Hyd/2025 (िनधा१रण वष१/Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Smt. Hemalatha Chervu Vs. Income Tax Officer HYDERABAD WARD 15 (1)

PAN:AODPC8304C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

िनधा१ौरती (cid:554)ारा/Assessee by: Shri Akash Deshpande, CA राज(cid:830) व (cid:554)ारा/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 25/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/02/2026 आदेश/ORDER Per MANJUNATHA, G. A.M.

This appeal is filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated

06/11/2025, for the A.Y 2015-16.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, not filed her return of income for the A.Y 2015-16. The assessment has been reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the reasons recorded, as per which, income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment and, accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act, dated, 6/4/2022 was issued and served on the assessee. However, the assessee has not filed return of income in compliance with the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, notice under section 142(1) along with detailed questionnaire was issued to the assessee on 20/09/2023. However, the assessee has failed to submit the required details/information regarding the above- mentioned financial transactions. The A.O after considering the relevant non-responsive nature of the assessee has obtained bank account statement under section 133(6) of the Act and observed that the assessee has made huge cash deposits of Rs.59,85,508/- into her bank account and also earned interest income of Rs.36,310/-. Since the assessee has not filed any information, the A.O passed the assessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, on 18/03/2022 and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.60,21,818/-, by making additions of Rs.60,21,818/- under section 69A of the Act, as unexplained money.

3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). Before the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee neither appeared nor filed any explanation. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) disposed of the appeal filed by the assessee ex-parte for non-prosecution and upheld the additions made by the A.O towards the cash deposits into bank account under section 69A of the Act.

4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the reopening of the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act dated 06/04/2022 is beyond the limitation provided under section 148 of the Act and the 1st proviso provided therein and thus, the order passed by the A.O under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, is invalid and liable to be quashed. The learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that this issue is fully covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad Benches in the case of Peda Subbarao Unnam vs. Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 1664/Hyd/2025 dated, 28/01/2026, where the Tribunal by following the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Telangana, in the case of Cyberabad Citizens Health Services Private Limited vs. Dy. CIT in writ petition No.25121 of 2024, dated, 17/11/2025 held that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act dated, 6/4/2022 is barred by limitation and liable to be quashed. Therefore, he submitted that the order passed by the A.O under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, should be quashed.

6. The Ld. Sr. AR for the Revenue Dr. Sachin Kumar, on the other hand, supporting the order o