Sasalakunte Kasimsab Alipeer Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
A wine-shop proprietor admitted a 10% gross profit rate during a survey but did not file a revised return. The AO added ₹12.50 lakh on the strength of that statement. He also questioned cash deposited during demonetisation, despite the proprietor’s explanation that it came from recorded cash sales. The Bangalore Tribunal deleted both disputed additions after examining the trading account, the excise licence and the cash-flow details. :chatgpt-content-reference{index=”0″}
The survey statement and the assessment
The assessee operated a wine shop in Davanagere. He filed his return for AY 2017–18 declaring income of ₹8,50,680. A survey under section 133A was conducted on 28 February 2018, after the close of the relevant financial year.
During the survey, the assessee referred to a 10% gross profit rate, compared with the 8.73% rate stated in the return. The survey declaration also referred to income from items such as soft drinks, soda and snacks. The total additional disclosure recorded by the Department was ₹12.50 lakh. Although the assessee undertook to revise his return, he did not do so. The AO consequently added the disclosed amount. The order records these facts while also stating that the assessee paid ₹40 lakh as tax. :chatgpt-content-reference{index=”1″}
