Nusrath Banu vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2(3)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Nusrath Banu, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. The assessee, an individual and proprietor of M/s. KGN Traders, engaged in the business of trading livestock, filed her return of income on 25.12.2020. A search and seizure operation was conducted on 03.01.2023, and it was found that the assessee received unaccounted interest income from Maharashtra Food Processing and Cold Storage during the financial year 2019-2020. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.54 lakhs on account of interest income. The assessee challenged this before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) but was unsuccessful.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT Appeals 12, Hyderabad erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT Appeals 12, Hyderabad and the AO ought to have granted to the Appellant an opportunity to cross-examine the parties.
• 3. Whether the Assessment order is void ab initio as the mandatory procedure specified in Sec 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was not followed.
• 4. Whether the Ld. CIT A 12, Hyderabad and the AO erred in not properly appreciating the material evidence.
• 5. Whether the Assessment order is bad in law as the AO and the CIT A 12, Hyderabad completely relied on the alleged extracts of documents from the pen drive without any other corroborative evidence.
• 6. Whether the Ld CIT A 12, Hyderabad and the AO ought to have appreciated that there are multiple vendors trading with the same business name KGN traders with Maharashtra Food Processing and Cold Storage.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Jora Ram Mali Vs. ACIT, Circle – 4(2)

• Hind Ice & Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Central Circle -4(2), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2020-21Allowed

• Karnimata Cold Storage Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-38, Midnapur

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Shri Pandian Hari Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 11(4), Chennai

• Sh. Virendra Kumar Jain vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(4), Lalitpur

  Agra bench

• ACIT Vs. Trilok Chaudhary