Chandrasekhar Yernena vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Chandrasekhar Yernena, engaged in the liquor business, filed his income return for the Assessment Year 2016-17 electronically on 29/09/2016, admitting a total taxable income of Rs. 9,53,550/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and the assessee was asked to produce bills, vouchers, and details of unsecured loans. However, the assessee failed to provide the requisite information and books of account. Consequently, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer estimated the income from the liquor business at 5% of the total stock put to sale and added Rs. 15,00,000/- as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act. The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was dismissed. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC is justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- made by the Ld. AO U/s. 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment?
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC is justified in confirming the Ld. AO’s estimation of 5% of the total value of the stock put to sale as profit in the liquor business of the assessee?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• POOJA PRABHAKAR Vs. ITO NCW 15 (1) CHENNAI

• Anurag Arora Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2021-22Allowed

• Kamla Devi, W/o Parma Nand vs The ITO, Dharamshala

  Chandigarh bench

• Sriyans Enterprises Limited Vs ITO Ward-5(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2016-2017Allowed

• M.N Manjula Vs. The Income Tax Officer

  SMC Bench: Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Gujarat Trading Co. Vs ITO, Ward-34(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2018-19Dismissed