9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves the estimation of production of bricks and the application of gross profit rate. Estimation of Production of Bricks: The Department and the assessee raised cross-appeals against the order of the learned CIT(A) regarding the estimated production of bricks. The Departmental appeal questioned the direction to restrict the estimated production to 35,00,000 bricks, while the assessee's appeal challenged the estimation based on the sanctioned capacity of the kiln and the gross profit rate applied. The AO had initially framed the assessment at an income different from the one declared by the assessee, based on the production of bricks. The assessee argued that continuous extraction of soil had led to the need to purchase soil from outside for brick manufacturing. The learned CIT(A) found the AO's estimation to be exaggerated and unrealistic, considering the details available on record. The learned CIT(A) concluded that the production should be near the licensed capacity sanctioned by the Mining Department and estimated the total production at 35 lakhs for the year. The Department contested this estimation, while the assessee argued for a lower estimation and a different gross profit rate. Ultimately, the Tribunal found the learned CIT(A)'s estimation and gross profit rate application to be unjustified and deleted the addition made based on these grounds. Application of Gross Profit Rate: The learned CIT(A) had applied a gross profit rate of 22 per cent, higher than the 18 per cent declared by the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the learned CIT(A) did not consider the past history of the assessee or comparable cases in determining the gross profit rate. The Tribunal found the addition based on the higher gross profit rate to be unjustified and deleted it. The Tribunal also cited a previous decision supporting their view. Consequently, the Department's appeal was dismissed, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
|
