IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD SMC BENCH : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENC E ) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1461 /HYD./201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 1 - 12 M/S KANAKADURGA WINES VS. ITO, WARD 1 VIJAYAWADA KOTHAGUDEM PAN: AAKFK 6560 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : NONE . FOR REVENUE : SH. ROHIT M U JUMDAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 0 9 / 12 /2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17 / 12 /2020 O R D E R THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 7 , HYDERABAD DATED 23 RD OCTOBER, 2015 RELATING TO A.Y. 201 1 - 12 . THIS APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE ON 0 9 .12.2020 . NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE WHILE SRI ROHIT MAJU M DAR, D.R. APPEARED FOR THE REVENUE. 2. THIS APPEAL IS COMING UP FOR HEARING FROM 31.01.2018 O N WARDS AND WAS REPRESENTED BY HIS COUNSEL SRI S.RAMA RAO . ON 29.10.201 9 THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN HIS VAKALAT VIDE LETTER DATED 27.10.2019 , AND THEREFORE, THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTED ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. ON 19.12.2019, NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, AND, THEREFORE, ANOTHER NOTICE WAS DIRECTED TO B E ISSUED BY SPEED POST. THEREAFTER , DUE TO C OVID 19 PANDEMIC LOCK DOWN, THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON DIFFERENT ITA NO. 1461 /HYD./201 7 A.Y. 201 1 - 12 KANAKA DURGA WINES 2 DATES TILL 30.09.2020. ON 30.09.2020 ALSO , NONE APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE, HENCE THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 2.11.2020 AND NOTICE WAS ISSU ED TO ASSESSEE BY RPAD. ON 02.11.2020 WHEN THE MATTER CAME FOR HEARING, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THERE IS A DEFECT IN NOTICE, AND, THEREFORE, ANOTHER NOTICE WAS DIRECTED TO BE ISSUED AND THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 09.12.2020. ON THIS DATE ALSO , NON E APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE AND AS SEEN FROM THE TRAC K CONSIGNMENT RECORD OF POSTAL AUTHORITIES, THE COVER WAS RETURNED BY ASSESSEE AS REFUSED. THE ASSESSEE HAS THUS NOT ACCEPTED THE NOTICE, NOR HAS HE FURNISHED ANY CHANGE IN THE ADDRESS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. SINCE THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN HIS VAKALAT AND IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE, ASSESSEE HAS NOT ENGAGED ANY OTHER COUNSEL , OR DID ANY PERSON TO APPEAR ON ITS BEHALF, THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING EX PARTE THE ASSESSEE. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON RETAIL BUSINESS OF LIQUOR AND SINCE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAINED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE AO ESTIMATED INCOME AT 5% OF THE COST OF GOODS PUT TO SALE AGAINST WHICH ASSESSEE WENT IN APPE AL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, AGAINST WHICH ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION AS TO HOW THE SAID PERCENTAGE IS HIGHER AND NOT REASONABLE AN D WHY IT IS TO BE ESTIMATE D AT A LOWER PERCENTAGE . WITH REGARD TO ADDITION S OF RS.29,33,519/ - AND RS.2,90,000/ - AND RS. 25,000/ - ALSO , THERE IS N EITHER EXPLANATION OFFERED BY ASSESSEE, NOR ANY EVIDENCE FILED IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION FOR DELETIO N OF THE SAID ADDITIONS. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, ASSESSEES GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE REJECTED AND THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17 /12/ 2020. SD/ - (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17 TH DECEMBER, 2020 GMV ITA NO. 1461 /HYD./201 7 A.Y. 201 1 - 12 KANAKA DURGA WINES 3 COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S KANAKA DURGA WINES, C/O SH RI SAMMETA BHASKARA RAO, H .NO. 41 - 11 - 19/B, BABURAO STREET, RAGHAVA NILAYAM, KRISHNA LANKA, VIJAYAWADA 520 013 . 2. ITO, WARD 1, KOTHAGUDEM . 3. ACIT, KHAMMAM RANGE, KHAMMAM 4 . CIT( A ) - 7 , HYDERABAD. 5 . PR.CIT - 7 , HYDERABAD 6 D.R. ITAT HYDERABAD 7 . GUARD FILE