Case Law Details
ITO Vs Sadhanakari Khaja Rahmathulla (ITAT Hyderabad)
ITAT Hyderabad held that other than being an agriculturist, the assessee was license holder of retail sale of IMFL. However, the said fact was not verified by CIT(A). Accordingly, held that case has not been properly adjudicated by CIT(A).
Facts-
During the course of assessment proceedings, AO noted that other being an agriculturist, the assessee is also a licence holder for retail sale of IMFL. Going through the bank transactions of the assessee, AO concluded that the transactions are not for agricultural operations and the assessee had either carried out unknown business or utilized the bank transactions to evade legitimate tax payable. In view of the above, the AO made addition of Rs. 2,41,18,080/- to the total income of the assessee and completed the assessment determining the total income at Rs. 2,42,84,080/-.
Post remand report, AO deleted addition of Rs. 2,16,54,600/- and sustained addition of Rs. 24,63,480/-. Being aggrieved by the relief granted by CIT(A), the revenue as well as the assessee are in appeal before the Tribunal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
