9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant : Mrs Mauna M Bhatt, Advocate ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), the appellantrevenue has challenged the order dated 12.5.2017 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in ITA No.1904/Ahd/2012, by proposing the following question, stated to be a substantial question of law. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in confirming the order of the CIT (A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer by applying a net profit @ 8% in the case of an assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the net profit at the rate of 8% of the total receipt of ₹ 36,31,52,740/-, which comes to ₹ 2,90,52,220/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who was of the view that since the books of accounts had not been rejected by the Assessing Officer, there was no question for estimating the net profit of the assessee. The revenue carried the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal, but did not succeed. 4. Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant, assailed the impugned order by reiterating the reasoning adopted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. 5. As can be seen from the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), he, in paragraph 25 of hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted to assess the income at the income assessed in the order dt. 17.12.2009 u/s. 143(3). 6. The Tribunal, in the impugned order, has concurred with the findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the conclusion arrived at by him based upon such findings of fact. 7. Thus, the Tribunal has recorded concurrent findings of fact after appreciation of the material on record and has based its conclusions thereon. Under the circumstances, the impugned order being based upon concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal, does not give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial question of law, so as to warrant interference. 8. In the absence of any substantial question of law, the appeal fails an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
