9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,61,867/- and accordingly, the assessee gets a relief of ₹ 6,11,467/-, which does not need any interference on my part, hence, WE uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and accordingly, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed. - ITA No.741/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 16-9-2016 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Department : Dr. Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. For The Assessee : S h . FR Meena, SR. DR ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 11/12/2014 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad on the following grounds:- 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainable on various legal and factual grounds. 4. That having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging the interest u/s 234A, 234 Band 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the appellant craves to leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above' grounds are without prejudice to each other. 2. The facts in brief are that assessee had filed return of income on 30.7.2011 declaring income of ₹ 198830/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. In this case notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued on 24.9.2012 and 4.12.2012 respectively. The assessee is d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aggrieved with the aforesaid order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 28.2.2014 has partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes and applied NP rate @8% instead of 10%. 4. Now the Assessee is aggrieved against the impugned order and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel of the Assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has reduced the NP rate from 10% to 8% on estimation basis, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. He further stated that the said applied rate of 8% is still at higher side which may be reduced to a reasonable rate. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order which may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had tried at length to explain what commission income is. However, fact remains that he had not disclosed these transactions in return of income and neither at assessment nor at appeal stage did he submit any cogent evidence that these transactions relate to commission income. These arguments therefore lack merit. However, I find no justification for applying NP rate of 10% as against declared NP rate of 8%. In my considered view NP rate of 8% instead of 10% would be justified at this is the NP Rate of disclosed turnover. Thus, applying NP rate of 8%, the addition is sustained to the extent of ₹ 24,61,867/- and appellant gets a relief of ₹ 6,11,467/-. The main issue having been decided thus, the grounds of appeal are not adjudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
