9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. MEENA, JJ. Represented by: Appellant by : Smt. Pratima Kaushik, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri Ashwani Taneja, FCA ORDER PER U.B.S. Bedi, J.M. This appeal of the department is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) Faridabad dated 27.1.2011 relevant to asstt. year 2004-05. The revenue in this case has taken 14 grounds whereas ground No. 14 is general which does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that issue in dispute is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of ITAT passed in ITA No. 3211 to 3214/D/07 dated 29th August, 2008 for the asstt. years 2000-01 to 2003-04 where facts and circumstances of the case are similar though amounts of additions are different. It was also submitted that above said order of Delhi F Bench has been followed in assessee s own case f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on which has not been refuted by the other side and in the case of assessee for the asstt. year 1999-2000, the Tribunal drew its conclusion in para 3 of its order in ITA No. 2407/D/2011 dated 15 th July, 2011 as under :- On due consideration of all facts and circumstances, we are of the view that there is no disparity on facts. The assessee has filed its return of income on 25.10.1999 declarin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar followed the order of his predecessor as well as of ITAT. However, he upheld the estimation of profit at 8% to the total turnover. This rate of gross profit applied in the present year is higher than the subsequent years decided by the Tribunal. Taking into consideration the order of learned CIT(A) in the light of Tribunal s order in assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 coupled with the stand of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
