VELAGAPUDI RAMA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 670/VIZ/2019Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 February 2021AY 2015-20163 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the grounds of appeal were not pressed by the assessee's AR before the CIT(A). Therefore, the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal found no reason to contradict this and dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2015-16. The grounds of appeal related to the rejection of books of account and estimation of income from various contracts.

What were the issues?

Whether the grounds of appeal were validly dismissed by the CIT(A) when they were not pressed by the assessee's representative.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HONBLE

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCA
For Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Sr.DR
Hearing: 16/02/2021

O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16/09/2019 impugned herein passed by the ld.CIT(A), Vijayawada u/sec. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") for the A.Y. 2015-16.

2.

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the AO rejected the books without bringing any evidence on record.

2. In estimating the income from main contracts at 10% amounting to Rs. 92,64,454/-.

3. In estimating the income on sub-contracts at 7% amounting to Rs. 1,75,000/- 4. In estimating the income from back to back sub-contracts at Rs. 92,64,454/-. For these and such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, the appellant prays that addition be deleted.”

3.

Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. We realise that the ld. CIT(A) while dealing with the issues raised by the Assessee in the instant appeal, determined as under:- “5. In these grounds of appeal, the Assessee has disputed the action of the AO in rejecting the books of account and estimating the business income from execution of contracts at 10%, 7% and 4% of the gross receipts in respect of main contracts, contracts undertaken as sub-contracts and contracts given to sub-contractors respectively. However, during the course of the appellant proceedings, these grounds of appeal were not pressed by the AR of the assessee vide order sheet noting dated 12/09/2019. Hence, these grounds of appeal are dismissed.”

4.

It reflects from impugned order that issues relates to the grounds raised in this appeal were not pressed in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by the Ld. A R of the Assessee therefore the appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) . From record we could not find any material and/or circumstance to contradict the determination/observation of the ld. CIT(A) and even otherwise it is not the case of the Assessee that though the grounds of appeal have been pressed before the ld. CIT(A), however, he observed and determined contrary. Hence, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the Assessee. Consequently, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is affirmed.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 16th day of Feb., 2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →