9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aised 6 grounds on two issues i.e., rejection of books of accounts and estimation of profits. The appeals are posted for hearing and notices were sent through RPAD to assessees, but the same are returned un-served with a postal remark "addressee left". There is no intimation about change of address. Accordingly, after hearing the learned D.R. the appeals were decided ex-parte assessee. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessees are carrying on the business of retail trade in liquor. While completing the assessment, the A.O. rejecting the book results declared by the assessees, estimated the gross profit at 27% on the value of the stock put to sale. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On the issue of rejec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale taking the previous history of prof it whereas the assessee has no past history and the liquor traders in Nalgonda District are selling the liquor as per MRP or even more than MRP. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon the decision of ITAT-B Bench, Hyderabad, in the case of M/s. Amaravathi Wines, Hyderabad in ITA.No.1196/Hyd/2011, dated 08.06.2012, since the volume of business, location of business and prof its in the case of Venkateswara Wines, Hyderabad cannot be compared with that of the assessee and also that each assessment proceedings are independent 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the understatement of sales determined in the assessment order instead of directing to estimate the net prof it @ 5% of cost of liquor put ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of M/s. Amaravati Wine Shop, in ITA No. 1196/Hyd/2011 dated 8.6.2012. Since the impugned order of the CIT(A) is in consonance with the consistent view taken by the coordinate benches of the Tribunal in similar matters, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders of the CIT(A). We accordingly uphold the same, rejecting the grounds of the Revenue in these appeals".
9. Consistent with the stand taken by the Tribunal in similar matters, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and we accordingly uphold the order of the CIT(A) and reject the grounds of the Revenue in this appeal.
10. In the result, Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.04.2014. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
