SRI RAGHAVENDRA LORRY SERVICES,VUJAYAWADA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VIJAYAWADA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not maintain proper books of accounts and could not prove ownership of assets for depreciation, the AO was justified in estimating profit. However, the estimation of 15% was considered high.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a transport operator, filed a return showing a loss. The AO rejected the books of accounts, estimated income at 15% of gross receipts, and allowed depreciation. The CIT invoked Section 263, setting aside the assessment and directing disallowance of depreciation.
What were the issues?
Whether the estimation of income by the AO at 15% of gross receipts was justified, and if a lower estimation rate, as per previous ITAT orders, should be applied.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.2,664 citing88 ITR 192 · 1973 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE
आदेशकीप्रतिलिपिअग्रेपिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- ननधधाररती/ The Assessee–M/s. Sri Raghavendra Lorry Services, 1. H.No.74, CTO Colony, Gurunanak Colony Road, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh – 520008. रधजस्व/The Revenue –DCIT, Circle-3(1), CR Buildings, MG Road, 2. Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh – 520002.
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 →- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026