BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

42 results for “section 68”+ Section 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,356Mumbai2,292Kolkata933Karnataka508Bangalore491Ahmedabad421Jaipur364Surat211Indore206Chennai197Pune197Chandigarh195Raipur189Hyderabad153Guwahati74Calcutta72Lucknow70Cochin69Rajkot61Amritsar57Nagpur56Ranchi47Visakhapatnam42Agra40Telangana39Cuttack34Patna25Allahabad21Jodhpur15Varanasi15SC12Dehradun11Rajasthan6Panaji4Orissa4Jabalpur3Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 14830Section 6827Section 143(3)26Addition to Income19Section 142(1)18Section 148A16Section 143(2)14Survey u/s 133A13Section 147

WALTAIR TRADERS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NEAC, DELHI

ITA 144/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2018-19
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 194ASection 194CSection 69C

133(6) of the Act to the party seeking details. In response, M/s. Adani Enterprises Ltdfurnished the requisite details. On going through the ledger account furnished by the party, Ld. AO observed that M/s.Adani Enterprises Ltd has made sales of Rs.87,08,56,625/- to the assessee and therefore the Ld AO considered the balance amount of Rs.41

MANOHARMAL,VIJAYAWADA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 619/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

12
Section 14411
Reopening of Assessment7
Unexplained Investment5
10 Feb 2026
AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 68

68 of the Act. 8. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld.AR submitted that though it is a matter of fact that the AO to verify the genuineness of the gift transaction had, in the course of the assessment proceedings, issued a notice under section 133(6

ZOYEB HYDERABADWALA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 433/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.433/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Zoyeb Hyderabadwala V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 27-32-9, Ground Floor Direct Taxes Building 75 Feet Road Mvp Double Road Visakhapatnam - 530001 Besides Gayatri College Mvp Colony [Pan: Aaapz3387M] Visakhapatnam - 530017 (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 68

133(6) of the Act on 06.01.2021. After careful analysis of the submission of the parties, Ld.AO observed that the assessee has not proved the genuineness and creditworthiness of the parties from whom the Page No. 2 I.T.A.No.433/VIZ/2024 Zoyeb Hyderabadwala unsecured loans were received. Therefore, the Ld. AO proceeded to frame the assessment by making the following additions

SRI RAJANI GOLD,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.162/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Rajani Gold V. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) D.No. 11-49-336B Central Revenue Building Sivalayam Street, I Town Mg Road – 520001 Vijayawada – 520001 Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfs6675E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

133(6) of the Act noticed that assessee has deposited Specified Bank Notes (SBN) in the bank accounts during the demonetization period as follows: - Rajani Gold SBNs Deposits during Demonetisation Period Denominations SBNs S.No. Bank Branch A/c No. 500s 1000s Amount 1. Andhra Bank Satyanarayanapuram 50411100001200 37058 33789 52318000 2. Indian Overseas Bank Park Road

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. AO, NFAC

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 118/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

68 of the Act while passing the order under section 143(3)r.w.s. 263 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the said assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee made written submissions contesting the addition of unsecured loans of Rs. 1,06,27,000/-. After examining the written submissions

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. AO, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 79/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

68 of the Act while passing the order under section 143(3)r.w.s. 263 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the said assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee made written submissions contesting the addition of unsecured loans of Rs. 1,06,27,000/-. After examining the written submissions

ACE URBAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 284/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.79, 118 & 284/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2016-17) Ace Urban Developers Private Limited V. The Asst. Cit- Circle-2(1) Module No. A1, A2,A3 Vijayawada – 520002 Quadrant No. 4, 4Thfloor Andhra Pradesh Cyber Tower, Hitech City Madhapur B.O. Sheikpet, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana [Pan: Aanca4001H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sk Gupta,Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Sr.Ar

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

68 of the Act while passing the order under section 143(3)r.w.s. 263 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the said assessment order, assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee made written submissions contesting the addition of unsecured loans of Rs. 1,06,27,000/-. After examining the written submissions

GANESH KUMAR PAIDI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), VIJAYAWADA

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 135/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250

133(6) to the Bank and ascertained that the total cash deposits of Rs. 1,77,17,320/- were made in during the year and Rs. 1,18,000/-were made in specified bank notes (SBNs) during demonetization period. The AO noticed that the assessee declared turnover of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- in his return of income

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

133(6) of the Act but has failed to do so. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee being a salaried employee, the provisions of section 69B of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. In response, the Ld. 14 DR submitted that the assessee has not submitted the balance sheet as he is a salaried individual

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/VIZ/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

133(6) of the Act but has failed to do so. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee being a salaried employee, the provisions of section 69B of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. In response, the Ld. 14 DR submitted that the assessee has not submitted the balance sheet as he is a salaried individual

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/VIZ/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

133(6) of the Act but has failed to do so. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee being a salaried employee, the provisions of section 69B of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. In response, the Ld. 14 DR submitted that the assessee has not submitted the balance sheet as he is a salaried individual

TADISETTI MURALI MOHAN,GUNTUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 34/VIZ/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

133(6) of the Act but has failed to do so. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee being a salaried employee, the provisions of section 69B of the Act are not applicable to the assessee. In response, the Ld. 14 DR submitted that the assessee has not submitted the balance sheet as he is a salaried individual

SRIDHAR YARLAGADDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 311/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.311/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sridhar Yarlagadda, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(2), Pan: Abdpy4072 G Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

133(6) of the Act to the Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Sainikpuri Branch, Hyderabad and called for the bank statement of the assessee. On perusal of the bank statement furnished by the Bank Authorities, the Ld. AO noted that the assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 15,42,000/- during the demonetization period. 3 Thereafter, the Ld. AO brought

KANISHKA F&B,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 501/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Tribunal. In respect of the belated filing of the appeal, the assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay along with an affidavit and the relevant paragraphs from the affidavit are extracted herein below:

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

133(6) of the Act to the assessee’s partners Shri Bhargav Swaroop Chitturi; Sri Polavarapu Sai Sitaram and Shri Satish Kumar Yarlagadda in reply these partners have furnished the information as called for. On 4 Kanishka F & B vs. ITO perusal of the information available before him, the Ld. AO observed that the assessee failed to furnish the details

ANGADALA RAMAKRISHNA,VELERU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDIVADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

ITA 242/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.242/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ramakrishna Angadala, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 7-121/B, Veeravalli, Bapulapadu, Ward-1, Krishna District-521110, Gudivada. Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Brwpa7639F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 23/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144

68,520/- from the Government on acquisition of land for Polavaram Canal on 08/07/2015 and the said amount was withdrawn and utilized for purchase of land in his name and that a part of the amount was also advanced to relatives as hand loans and that the amounts are repaid by the relatives to the tune

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 260/VIZ/2012[1984-85]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1984-85

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

6 I.T.A. Nos260 & 261./Viz/2012 L Sudha Bala, L/R of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy, Guntur same could not stand judicial scrutiny, as the Apex Court in a catena of cases held that if the AO was in possession of the information that income has escaped assessment he gets jurisdiction for reassessment and acting upon such information may be postponed

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 261/VIZ/2012[1985-86]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1985-86

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

6 I.T.A. Nos260 & 261./Viz/2012 L Sudha Bala, L/R of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy, Guntur same could not stand judicial scrutiny, as the Apex Court in a catena of cases held that if the AO was in possession of the information that income has escaped assessment he gets jurisdiction for reassessment and acting upon such information may be postponed

KOLLI SUBRAHMANYAM,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), , VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 134/VIZ/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(2)Section 263

133(6) by the AO and later informed the AO that the signature on the notarized affidavit purportedly given by him is not his signature and that the contents of the notarized affidavit are not true. The ld DR also stated that ld.CIT(A) has not accepted the cash loans and treated the same as unexplained cash credits u/sec. 68

DUPAGUNTLA PULLARAO,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 112/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.112/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Dupaguntla Pullarao, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Guntur. Ward-1(1), Pan: Bhmpd9811Q Guntur. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 29/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

133(6) of the Act from the banks wherein the assessee made the cash deposits during the demonetization period to the tune of Rs. 43,68,500/- in the light of the ITS data verified and confirmed. Since the assessee did not comply to the notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act with regard to filing of the return

PRITAM SINGH SAHNI,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 689/VIZ/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Apr 2021AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.689/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10) Pritam Singh Sahni Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop : Bombay Motor House Ward-4 Plot No.242 & 243 Rajahmundry Auto Nagar, Diwancheruvu Mandal Rajahmundry [Pan : Avmps9277L] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri B.Satyanarayana, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 06.04.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per D.S.Sunder Singh:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana, DR
Section 143(3)

68 as unexplained credits. The addition is required to be made by disallowing the purchases u/s 37(1) of the Act or at best invoking section 41(1) of the Act depending on the facts. In the instant case, the AO made the addition as unproved creditors without invoking any section of the Act. The Ld.CIT