Moorthy Vinodhini vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-19(6), Chennai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Moorthy Vinodhini, is in the business of procuring sand and other building materials and supplying them to real estate developers in Chennai under the name 'Dutech Enterprises'. During the demonetization period, she deposited Rs. 10,80,000/- in her bank account but did not file an income return for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte order under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, adding the entire credit of Rs. 6,90,13,510/- in the bank account as unexplained investment under Section 69 of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) estimated the income at 1.5% of the credit in the bank account and restricted the addition to Rs. 10,35,000/-. The Revenue is in appeal against the estimation of income at 1.5% of the turnover instead of 8% as provided in Section 44AD of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the estimation of income at 1.5% of the turnover is justified.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Sekar Kalaiselvi vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Chennai bench

• Mohan Bhaguji Nanaware vs. Ward 1(1), Kalyan

  Mumbai bench

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

  Chandigarh bench

• Sh. Rakesh Bansal vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-II(4), Faridabad, Haryana-121006

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2009-10Partly Allowed

• Shri Kishan Kumar Gupta Vs. The I.T.O

  Delhi ‘C’ Bench benchAY 2014-15Partly Allowed

• Shivanand Sharanappa Nashi vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Bangalore bench