2014 (9) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mined the books of account and estimated N.P. @ 5% on estimation basis - Relying upon The Commissioner Trade Tax, Lucknow Vs. M/s Herbochem Industries, Barabanki [2009 (8) TMI 1119 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] - Thus, no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against Revenue.
Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala And Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,JJ. For the Appellant : A. N. Mahajan/S. C. ,Ashok Kumar For the Respondent : Krishna Agrawal ORDER The present appeals are filed by the department against the orders dated 09.09.2009 and 12.05.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad in I.T.A. Nos. 363 & 364/Alld./2008 and I.T.A. Nos. 308 & 309/Alld./2010 for the assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06. On 10.12.201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed the books of account and estimated the N.P. rate @ 10% for the purpose of computing business income of the assessee and made the additions accordingly. The same were upheld by the first appellate authority. However, the Tribunal has restricted N.P. rate @ 5% and reduce the additions accordingly. Being aggrieved, the department has filed the present appeals. With this background, heard Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the appellant-department; and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the assessee-respondent. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that the A.O. has rejected the books of account under Section-145(3) of the Act and estimated the N.P. rate @ 10% on gross receipts. The same was uphe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r, Custom Vs. Stoneman Marbels (2011) 2SCC 758. In view of above, no question of law is emerging from the impugned order. Hence, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, the same is hereby sustained alongwith the reasons mentioned therein. Answer to substantial questions of law is in favour of the assessee and against the department. Remaining two appeals (Income Tax Appeal Nos. 270 of 2011 & 61 of 2012) are pertaining to the penalty levied by the A.O. under Section-271(1)(c) of the Act. When in quantum appeals additions were deleted (supra), then penalty orders did not survive. So, the Tribunal has rightly cancelled the penalties in both the assessment years under consideration. The same is hereby s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X