9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 923X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erved that majority of the expenses claimed to have been paid in cash. Complete vouchers have not been produced and not subjected to verification. The AO, therefore, doubted the accuracy of the book results and accordingly, rejected the same and by relying upon the decision of ITAT Hyderabad Bench, computed the income by applying the profit rate of 12.5%. However, interest paid to the partners and depreciation was allowed and income of the assessee was determined at ₹ 1,27,98,840/-. The addition was challenged before the ld. CIT(A) and it was submitted that 12.5% gross profit has been applied without looking into the past history and comparable cases, therefore, the profit rate applied is very high and exorbitant. The assessee filed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee for the assessment year 2005-06 in ITA No. 704 of 2008 dated 17.09.2010 in which the CIT(A) has confirmed the addition of ₹ 1,00,000/- on the identical issue and the departmental appeal has been dismissed. The same order has been followed in assessment year 2002-03 in the case of the same assessee in ITA No. 65/Agr./2006 and the departmental appeal has been dismissed vide order of the Tribunal dated 04.02.2011. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that past history of the assessee should be accepted and the profit rate should be further reduced and relied upon the following decisions : (i). Decision of Hon ble M.P. High Court in the case of Dinanath Dubey vs. CIT, 160 ITR 1, in which it was held Rejection of boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is doing the same business as was doing in the earlier years. The assessee has shown profit rate of 4.16% in assessment year under appeal, which is already excessive as compared to the preceding assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, in which the assessee has shown profit rate of 2.02% and 2.28%. The history of the assessee in earlier years is also quoted at page 2 of the appellate order, in which in earlier years, the ld. CIT(A) maintained addition of ₹ 1,00,000/- only on the same issue and the Tribunal dismissed the department appeal vide order dated 17.09.2010. Since the assessee has shown better results in the assessment year under appeal as compared to the earlier years and has maintained the same nature of business, therefore, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
