BANGAR RAJU PENMETSA,BHIMAVARAM vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(4), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1178/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 December 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)30 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the seized documents were not 'dumb documents' and constituted credible evidence. The assessee failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions as required by law.

What were the facts?

During a search operation, documents were found indicating a Rs. 43,50,000 transaction with Mohsin Khan and a Rs. 4,00,00,000 hand loan to M/s. Opus Holdings Pvt. Ltd. The assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations or evidence for these transactions during assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether seized documents constitute incriminating material for additions under Section 153A, and whether the assessee discharged the onus to prove the genuineness of unsecured loans under Section 68.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 69,Section 68,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Bangar Raju Penmetsa, C/o. P. Murali and Co., Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, Somajiguda, Hyderabad – 500082. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle – 1(4), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →