BALAKRISHNAMOORTHY PUNNAKAM,ELURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIVADA

ITA 625/VIZ/2025Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 August 2026AY 2017-188 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that payment to HPCL cannot be in cash and the discrepancy requires further investigation. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for verification of the differences and reconsideration of the addition on account of sundry creditors.

What were the facts?

The assessee, running a petrol station, had a discrepancy between expenses debited and payments made to HPCL. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 49,69,137/- treating the difference as cash payment, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of the difference between expenditure and payment to HPCL, treated as cash payment, is justifiable. Whether sundry creditors representing purchases can be doubted if purchases are not doubted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM DB BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G.

Hearing: 12.08.2026Pronounced: 21.08.2026

PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 25.08.2025 of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Assessment Centre [in short "NFAC"], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2 ITA.No.625/Viz./2025

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The Order under Sec.250, dt. 25.08.2025 passed by the CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi for the A.Y. 2017-18 may be erroneous both in law and also on facts of the case.

2.

Taking note of the fact that relevant supporting documents were already filed with the

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →