9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not applicable and they have been erroneously applied by the ld. CIT(A). Books of account were rejected. Therefore, the past history of the assessee is the best guide in determining the rate to be applied. As per the assessee’s past history (impugned order pages 8 to 9), in A.Y. 2010-11, the rate of 4.17% was applied. In A.Y. 2009- 10, the rate applied was 3.67%. In A.Y. 2008-09, the rate assessed was 4.63%. So, as per this past history of the assessee, the average rate comes to 4.16%, which is directed to be applied, as against that of 2.21% shown by the assessee. Unexplained introduction of capital - Held that:- The intangible addition made to the book profits during an assessment proceedings is as much a part of the assessee’s re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld CIT(A) erred in law in overlooking and thereby not considering the binding decisions of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court and Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench. 3. BECAUSE, while confirming the addition the Ld CIT(A) was highly unjustified in holding that if books are not maintained presumptive rate of 8% should have been applied by the AO ignoring the fact on records that appellant has maintained Books of Accounts which are audited and case do not fall under the provisions of section 44AD of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, upon overall consideration of the facts and in the circumstances of the case the authorities below was highly unjustified in treating the 'Capital Introduction' amounting to ₹ 6,00,000/- as 'unex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e this addition, observing as the following:- The assessee created as situation where by the assessment u/s 144 to the best of my judgment is the natural and logical corollary of the circumstances created by assessee himself. In view of the above facts and circumstances the books of accounts of assessee is rejected u/s 145(3) and applying the ratio decidendi of Hon 'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prabhat Kumar , and apply the rate of 12% of net profit on the gross contract receipts to compute the taxable income. In this way addition of ₹ 1,01,18,006/- being 12% of the contract receipt from civil contract of ₹ 8,43,16,720/- added to the income of the assessee. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has held as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Mahesh Chandra Contractor, vs. Income-tax Officer, in ITA No. 359/Agra/2011 in this case also the assessee was a civil contractor. Gross receipts from civil contract work was ₹ 1,90,96,014/-. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has shown Net Profit rate of 0.6% excluding interest income. The assessee was asked to produce complete set of account books alongwith all bills and vouchers. The assessee produced only computerized cash book and ledger, and failed to produce relevant bills and vouchers of purchase and expenses. The Assessing Officer rejected the books of account of the assessee and estimated the profit applying 8% profit rate on total receipts of ₹ 1,90,96,014/-. My predecessor confirmed the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In A.Y. 2008-09, the rate assessed was 4.63%. So, as per this past history of the assessee, the average rate comes to 4.16%, which is directed to be applied, as against that of 2.21% shown by the assessee. 7. Regarding Ground Nos. 4 and 6, the AO noticed capital addition of ₹ 35 lakh. He added ₹ 6 lakhs as unexplained introduction of capital, since though the assessee had stated this amount of ₹ 6 lakhs to be out of her past savings, she could not prove this contention. The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition. 8. The ld. Counsel for the assessee states that the entire amount of ₹ 6 lakhs cannot be added and some credit of past savings needs to be given. It has been argued that alternatively, this addition b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ofits during an assessment proceedings is as much a part of the assessee s real income, as that disclosed in the books of account. That being so, the assessee can very well avail the benefit of such addition for explaining the source of cash credits u/s 68 of the IT Act, i.e., unexplained introduction of capital in the present case. 11. In view of the above, accepting the assessee s alternative plea, the addition of ₹ 6 lakhs is ordered to be telescoped against the trading addition of ₹ 1,01,18,006/-. 12. Coming to Ground No.5, the AO made addition of ₹ 9,157/- u/s 43B of the IT Act, as though the amount was shown as payable, there was no evidence of actual payment thereof. The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
