IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.986/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Raziulla Syed, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad - 500 082. vs. (Int. TAXN.)-2, PAN BOTPS1888C Hyderabad.

(Appellant) (Respondent)

For Assessee : CA P Murali Mohan Rao For Revenue : Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 17.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G, A.M. :

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the final assessment order of the learned ITO- (Intl.Taxn.)-2, Hyderabad, dated 02.03.2024, pursuant to the directions of Disputes Resolution Panel-1 [in short “DRP”], Bengaluru, directions dated 29.02.2024, passed u/sec.144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”], relating to the assessment year 2017-2018.

2. At the very outset, there is a delay of 134 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for condonation of delay. We are satisfied with the reasons furnished by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal. We, therefore, condone the delay of 134 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits as under.

3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a Non-Resident Indian and working as Sr. Foreman (Civil Contracts) in Facilities Management Department with M/s. Qatar Energy and filed letter dated 25.08.2022 from his employer. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted on 22.10.2019 in the case of M/s. Skill Promoters Pvt Ltd, City Centre Mall, 6th Floor, Road No.1, Hyderabad, which is engaged in the business of Construction (Builders). The said company has entered into a Development Agreement with landlords and developed a commercial mall named "Sarath City Capital Mall" at Kondapur, Hyderabad. During the course of search and seizure proceedings, incriminating information(s)/

document(s)/loose sheets/documents pertaining to the assessee viz., Shri Raziulla Syed were found and as per which certain data in the form of excel sheets with respect to sale of commercial space were seized in pen drive. As the information contained in the seized document relates to the assessee, he along with one other had purchased a commercial property for a sale consideration of Rs.2,56,00,000/- during the year under consideration. Out of the total sale consideration, the assessee along with one other have paid an amount of Rs.1,11,50,000/- in cash and the balance amount of Rs.1,40,00,000 was paid through cheque. Since the assessee is having 50% share, he had paid an amount of Rs.70,00,000/- through cheque and an amount of Rs.55,75,000/- was paid in cash. On verification, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has not filed return of income for the year under consideration. Thus, the sources of the cash purchases remain unverified and hence escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee has also purchased equity shares for an amount of Rs.1,09,462/- and sold equity shares of Rs.53,200/- and has interest income of Rs.225/- from banks on which TDS has been deducted u/s.195 of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, in absence of proper explanation offered by the assessee with supporting documentary evidences such as bank statements etc., the Assessing Officer reopened the case of the assessee for assessment u/sec.147 of the Act and issued show cause notice u/sec.148A(b) of the Act originally under old procedure on

23.04.2021.

3.1. Subsequently, in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal [2022 SCC Online SC 543] related to reopening of assessment in Sections 147, 148, 149 and 151 were substituted by a completely new regime through the Finance Act, 2021 were with effective from 01.04.2021 prescribed under the same provisions (Sections 147-151), including a new provision Sect