9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing grounds: "1. Because the order appealed against is bad in fact and in law. 2. Because the learned C.I.T. (Appeal) has fixed the N.P. (Net Profit) rate at 3% instead of 2.86% as shown by the appellant. 3. Because the learned C.I.T. (Appeal) has not considered the written submissions made before him in correct perspective. 4. Because the increase in Net Profit rate from 2.86% to 3% is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I.T is ad-hoc, and there is no relevant material to corroborate such increase in N.P rate." 2. The AO, after rejecting the assessee's books of account, applied a net profit rate of 3.5% on the gross receipts of Rs. 11,27,43,678/-, computing the net profit earned by the assessee at Rs. 38,46,029/- as against the net profit declared at Rs. 30,37,080/-, at the rate of 2.87%. Addition of Rs. 9,08,949 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt, the past history needs to be followed in such cases. 6. As such, the net profit rate of 2.65% is directed to be applied and the addition is directed to be reduced accordingly. I.T.A No. 120/Agra/2016 7. This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13, taking the following grounds: "1. Because the order appealed against is bad in fact and in law. 2. Because the learned C.I.T. (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Because the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa Vs Maharaja Sri B.P, Deo reported in AIR 1970 (S.C.) 670 has held that the assessment must be based on some relevant material. It is not a power that can be exercised under the sweet will and pleasure of the concerned authorities. In the present case fixing N.P @ 3% has no basis. 7. Because the act of increasing N.P rate by learned C.I.T i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
