9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar business. Estimation of net profit must be on the basis of facts involved in each and every case. Therefore, in our view, there is no error committed by the AO in estimating the profit at 2.5% of the total turnover. Status of the assessee being AOP or a firm - Held that:- Assessee fairly admitted that the same has not been verified by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, according to him, the assessment order is erroneous to that extent. As rightly pointed out by the CIT, the AOP attracts the maximum marginal rate of tax and therefore, non verification of the same also makes the assessment order erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. In view of the same, we reject the ground of appeal No.4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs (ITA No.148 to 177/Hyd/2012) had estimated the income of the assessee therein from retail liquor business at 5% of the total turnover. Therefore, he was of the opinion that there is short computation of income by ₹ 7,37,950 in the case of the assessee. He further observed that in the return of income, assessee had claimed to be a registered firm, whereas in the Audit report, the status of the assessee was claimed as AOP. He observed that as per the provisions of section 167B of the Act, the AOP attracts the maximum marginal rate and since the AO has failed to verify the correct status of the assessee, he was of the opinion that the assessment made by the AO is both erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 013 dated 23.07.2013. Copies of the same are also filed berfore us. 5. The learned DR however, supported the orders of the CIT. 6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that the AO has called for books of account of the assessee but the assessee had failed to produce the same. Therefore, AO had estimated the income of the assessee at 2.5% of the turnover. The CIT wants the same to be estimated at 5% of the total turnover because the Tribunal in the case of an assessee carrying on the same business of sale of IMFL has estimated the income at 5% of the turnover. This, in our view, is not justified as held by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. The uniform net profit cannot be adopted in each ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
