TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1846
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the assessee is a doctor (General Medicine) and during the concerned previous year he practices from clinics including the ones under M/s. Apollo Hospital Enterprises Limited. The assessee filed his return of income for AY 2014-15 on 30.10.2014 admitting total income of Rs. 20,34,140/- (after claiming deduction u/s chapter VIA). A search operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of Apollo Hospitals, Chennai in January 2016. A statement u/s 132(4) of the Act was recorded from Ms. Subhadra G., Manager (Operations), Apollo Hospital on 5th January 2016 by the DDIT(Inv) Unit-2(3), Chennai during the search conducted at the premises of Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Limited, Greams Lane, Off Greams Road, Chennai. It was found that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 in a sworn statement admissible in evidence. Since there are no other books of accounts/documents/assets relating to the assessee was seized which is a prerequisite for initiating proceedings u/s 153A read with 153C, it was deemed fit to invoke the provisions of section 147, which is in accordance with law. The appellant has originally filed a return of income on 30.10.2014 admitting an income of Rs.20,34,140/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3)r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 30.11.2019 assessed total income of Rs.27,90,840/- after making addition of rs.7,56,700/-. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the order of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... minimum step required from the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the appellant is a 92 years old senior citizen and his auditor Mr. V. Narayanan has died on 20.12.2020 during Covid-19 pandemic therefore,instead of remanding back to the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh, we are inclined to decide the appeal seeing the age (92Yrs) and peculiar circumstances of this case. 5. The order of the co-ordinate bench dated 20.09.2022 in the case of Dr.Sreenivasalu Reddy Ponnaluru [ITA Nos. 673-678/Chny/2022] in similar circumstances held as under: "5. From facts, it emerges that the Doctor is an ENT specialist working as a consultant Doctor in Apollo Hospital. Based on search findings on Hospital, the consultation fee of the Doctor has been estim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Apollo hospitals. If not why? Ans: The fees collected by the employed doctors of Apollo hospitals (i.e.) 7 doctors in the nephrology department are booked in the accounts of Apollo hospitals. The fees collected by the remaining doctors are not booked in our accounts. The nonemployee doctors have their discretion to fix their fees. They pay monthly rent of Rs.13,800 p.m. presently. In case of part-time Doctors, the rent is charged on an hourly basis. The fees charged by the non-employee doctors are not booked in the accounts of Apollo hospitals even before I took over. I am continuing the same procedure. Dr. Satyabhama, Director of Medical Services only has the final say regarding the fees of non-employee doctors and whether or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tract figures. 6. It could also be seen that as per the submission of the assessee all out patients were not charged. The certain category of patients and review patients would not be charged if they visit within 15 days of first consultation. The fee prescribed by Apollo Hospitals for Master Health Check-up patients is Rs.150/- only. This being the case, the assessee Doctor cannot be expected to charge substantially higher amount as considered by Ld. AO and therefore, the estimation as made by Ld. AO could not be upheld. 7. We find that the whole basis of addition is the statement of Ms. Subhadra G. who does not possess any concrete data except abstract figures of number of patients. There is no corroborative evidence to ....