ADINARAYANA RAJU MANDAPATI,NALGONDA vs. ITO., WARD-1, NALGONDA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the addition on account of agricultural income was subsumed within the larger addition for unexplained cash deposits. It also found that the AO had travelled beyond the scope of limited scrutiny in making additions related to agricultural income.
What were the facts?
The assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny to verify cash deposits. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for unexplained cash deposits and agricultural income, exceeding the scope of limited scrutiny. The CIT(A) confirmed these additions.
What were the issues?
Whether additions made by the AO were beyond the scope of limited scrutiny and whether agricultural income should be treated as a separate addition when it was part of bank deposits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against two separate Orders both dated 25.07.2025 arising from assessment order passed u/sec.143(3) and the Order passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Income Tax Act [in short "the Act"], 1961 respectively, for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. First, we take up the appea
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026