ACIT Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Raichandani Pahal Developers LLP, Hyderabad
In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 267/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Nov 2022AY 2019-20
Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Raichandani Pahal Income Tax, Developers Llp. Central Circle – 1(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaxfr6285M. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.16/Hyd/2022 (In Ita 267/Hyd/2022) M/S. Raichandani Pahal Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Developers Llp. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 1(3), Pan : Aaxfr6285M. Hyderabad. (Cross Objector / (Respondent) Appellant) Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu Revenue By: Shri Kumar Adithya Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.11.2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Appeal By The Revenue & Cross-Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad Dated 26.04.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :
For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68
…s remand report stating that genuineness was proved to some extent and he did not make proper enquiry before invoking section 68 of the Act and relied on decisions CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt.Ltd reported in ITD 1591 ITR 78, CIT Vs. Manoj Kumar Vipin Kumar 441 ITR 632 (Raj) etc. 9.3. Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee had discharged the burden of proof by proving the ingredients of section 68 in respect of Girish Gurbani and Kirti Gurbani also. To prove and 38 to 41 of the paper book. In respect of creditworthiness, assessee submitted that it had filed the copies of computation of total income of A.Y.…
