MARGANI GOVINDA RAJU,KADIYAPULANKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), RAJAHMUNDRY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 251/VIZ/2023Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam20 March 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)9 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the enhancement order by the CIT(A) and sustained the disallowance of Rs. 10,90,000/- made by the AO. The assessee failed to produce evidence for the claimed agricultural income.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed agricultural income of Rs. 31,00,000/- as exempt. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed Rs. 10,90,000/- due to lack of evidence, estimating income at Rs. 60,000/- per acre. The CIT(A) enhanced the disallowance to Rs. 31,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in enhancing the disallowance of agricultural income, and whether the AO's disallowance was sustainable due to lack of evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 131(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE

Hearing: 18/03/2024

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee – Margani Govind Raju, D.No. 7-123, Kadiyapulanka, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh – 533126. 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – the Income Tax Officer, O/o. Income Tax Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Veerabhadrapuram, Rajamahendravaram, Andhra Pradesh – 533105.

3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, 4.आयकर आयुक्त (अपील)/ The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),

9 5. ववभधगीय प्रनतनिधर्, आयकर अपीलीय अधर्करण, ववशधखधपटणम/ DR, ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6.गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam

More judgments on Section 131(1)

All 149 judgments and leading authorities on Section 131(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →