INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAKINADA vs. KANDREGULA PEDDI RAJU, NARSAPURAM
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose
ITA 41/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Balakrishnan Sआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.41/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Income Tax Officer Vs. Kandregula Peddi Raju Kakinada Narasapuram [ Pan : Andpr9130L] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None रधजस्व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Aparna Villuri, Dr
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 144Section 147Section 251Section 269SSection 271DSection 69
section 271D of the Act were initiated for violation of provisions of 269SS and a penalty of Rs.60,25,000/- was levied, wherein, the assessee has accepted cash amounting to Rs.60,25,000/- as sale consideration against sale of immovable property vide Document
No.4767/2015 dated 17.11.2015. 4. Aggrieved by the penalty order, assessee preferred an appeal before the learned
