SAMA RAMACHANDRA REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, HYDERABAD
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above”
ITA 164/HYD/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2020AY 2005-06
Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2005-06
For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Sri Kiran Katta, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 221Section 221(1)
disallowing the investment made by the assessee in M/s DNA Biotech Ltd. and treated it as unexplained
Investment u/s 69 of the IT Act which is not correct, bad in law and not justified.
The Assessing
Officer has added to the tune of Rs.1,00,00,000/- contending that the assessee has not offered any explanations and added back