Andhra Pradesh Medical Services and Infrastructure Development Corporation vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Guntur

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Andhra Pradesh Medical Services and Infrastructure Development Corporation, an Association of Persons (AOP), had not filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on substantial financial transactions flagged by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). The AO issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, and the assessee requested a notice under Section 148 of the Act to facilitate filing the return. The AO passed an order under Section 148A(d) and issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act. Subsequently, the AO passed an assessment order under Section 147 r.w. Section 144 r.w. Section 144B of the Act, determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 283,75,74,884/- after making certain additions/disallowances. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, which was dismissed for want of prosecution. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order of the CIT(A) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and is liable to be set aside?
• 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the issues on merits?
• 3. Whether the assessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 is bad in law and liable to be quashed?
• 4. Whether the addition of Rs. 2,82,01,24,014/- treating time deposits as unexplained under section 69 is justified?
• 5. Whether the provisions of sections 68/69 are applicable to Government funds received and utilized for specific purposes?
• 6. Whether the addition of Rs. 2,61,169/- being contract receipts is justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shri Deepak Devidas Sajnani v/s The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation), Ward – 4(2)(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Vision Diagnostic India Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT

  Delhi bench

• Madhusudhanarao Ramisetty vs. Income Tax Officer

  Visakhapatnam bench

• ADIL vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘A’ benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Praveen Kumar Patwa HUF Vs ITO Ward-47 (2), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2015-2016Allowed

• Prabakaran Chandru Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tiruvarur