9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal in its order dated 27.11.2008 - The matter is remitted to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh on merits, in accordance with law - ITA No. 400 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2011 - MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel, for the appellant. Mr. M.R. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 400 and 555 of 2009 as learned counsel for the parties are agreed that they raise identical issues. For brevity, the facts are being taken from ITA No. 400 of 2009. 2. This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal by the revenue. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. The issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the net profit rate of 5% applied by the Tribunal was justified. 6. The Assessing Officer had taken the rate of profit to be 8% which was affirmed by the CIT(A) but on appeal the Tribunal while reducing the net profit rate to 5% had recorded as under:- We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on the file. Brief facts are that the assessee company was engaged in the contract work of Govt. of Haryana. The assessment was completed under Section 144 on 03.03.2003 and the order was duly served upon the assessee. The Assessing Officer rejected the accounts of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one, we are holding so. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to apply the rate of 5% against 8% applied in the impugned order, consequently, this ground of the assessee is partly allowed. This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of both the learned representatives. 7. A simple reading of the aforesaid finding clearly shows that the Tribunal had reduced the net profit rate to 5% on the premises that counsel for both the parties had agreed for the same. However, a copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 11.2.2011 has been produced wherein the department had filed MA Nos. 117 118/Chd/2009 in ITA Nos. 433 and 434/Chd/2008 bringing the fact to the notice of the Tribunal that the departmental representative had n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
