PATTABI REDDY BARANKABAVI,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 393/HYD/2020Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 October 2021AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's plea to be without merit. It held that estimations of income cannot be treated as binding precedents if they do not consider all relevant facts, including state excise law and policy defining retail margins.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 challenged the estimation of income at 5% from their wine business by the lower authorities. The assessee argued that retail margins for liquor sales are typically 2-4%.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of income by tax authorities for a retail liquor business was justified and whether previous judicial pronouncements on retail margins could be considered binding precedents without considering specific state excise policies.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2013-14 arises from the CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad’s order dated 13-02-2020 passed in case No. 0263/ CIT(A)-7/ 2015-16, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. None represented the assessee whereas Sri Swaroop Mannava, Ld. DR has appeared for department. Case file perused.

Mr. Pattabi Reddy Barankabavi, Sec.

2.

The assessee’s sole substantive grievance challenges correctness of both the lower authorities’ action estimating income of Rs.17,82,947 @ 5% from wine business. The assessee’s grounds plead that such an estimation of income in retail sale on liquor does not exceed 2 to 4% in normal course as per various judicial pronouncements. The same is found to be without any merit as such an estimation could not be treated as a binding precedent in light of CIT vs. B.R. Constructions (1993) 202 ITR 222 (AP) since not considering all the relevant facts in light of the state excise law/policy defining retail margins.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in Open Court on 08th October, 2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: the 08th October, 2021. * gmv Copy of the Order forwarded to:

1. 1. Mr. Pattabi Reddy Barankabavi, Flat no.2, Sai Sadan Apartments, Om Sai Colony, Secunderabad 500 004 2. I T O, Ward 15(1), Hyderabad 3. ACIT, Range 15, Hyderabad 4. CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad 5. Pr.CIT -7, Hyderabad 6. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad.

7. Guard File.

Mr. Pattabi Reddy Barankabavi, Sec.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →