KANAKADURGA WINES, VIJAYAWADA,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOTHAGUDEM, KOTHAGUDEM

This appeal is coming up for hearing from 31.01.2018 onwards and was represented by his Counsel Sri S.Rama Rao. On 29.10.2019 the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has withdrawn his Vakalat vide letter dated 27.10.2019, and therefore, the Tribunal directed issuance of notice to the assessee. On 19.12.2019, none was present on behalf of the assessee, and, therefore, another notice was directed to be issued by speed post. Thereafter, due to Covid 19 Pandemic lock down, the appeal was fixed for hearing on different ./2017 A.Y. 2011-12 Kanaka Durga Wines dates till 30.09.2020. On 30.09.2020 also, none appeared for assessee, hence the case was adjourned to 2.11.2020 and notice was issued to assessee by RPAD. On 02.11.2020 when the matter came for hearing, it was noticed that there is a defect in notice, and, therefore, another notice was directed to be issued and the matter was listed for hearing on 09.12.2020. On this date also, none appeared for the assessee and as seen from the ‘track consignment’ record of postal authorities, the cover was returned by assessee as ‘refused’. The assessee has thus not accepted the notice, nor has he furnished any change in the address before this Tribunal. Since the Counsel for the assessee has withdrawn his Vakalat and in spite of service of notice, assessee has not engaged any other counsel, or did any person to appear on its behalf, the case was taken up for hearing ex parte the assessee.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is carrying on retail business of liquor and since assessee has not maintained any books of accounts, the AO estimated income at 5% of the cost of goods put to sale against which assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has confirmed the assessment order, against which assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Assessee has not filed any evidence in support of his contention as to how the said percentage is higher and not reasonable and why it is to be estimated at a lower percentage. With regard to additions of Rs.29,33,519/- and Rs.2,90,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- also, there is neither explanation offered by assessee, nor any evidence filed in support of its contention for deletion of the said additions. In view of the same, assessee’s grounds of appeal are rejected and the appeal is dismissed.