2016 (12) TMI 1778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1% which will take the net profit for the relevant year at 6.14% which will still be much higher than 5.5%, the average of two preceding assessment years. In view of the above discussion and the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that CIT(A) was justified in directing the AO to recompute the profits by increasing the same @ 1% as against 2% applied by the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, confirm the order of the learned CIT(A).
SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Mohd. Javed For the Respondent : Shri C.P. Rawka ORDER PER SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM These appeals have been preferred by the revenue and the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A)-II, Indore, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e receipts were of ₹ 74.87 crores while filing the return of income it increased to ₹ 2.19 crores. The assessee submitted that the total expenditure of ₹ 213 crores was not debited in the books of accounts, therefore, the difference was surrendered and it was shown in the return of income and after query the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee has carried out the working activities at different sites of Indore, Dhar, Beora, Rajasthan, etc. and has claimed excessive expenses in respect of all the sites. No register is maintained for separate sites, therefore, the Assessing Officer has rejected the books of accounts and increased the net profit to 2% of the receipts which comes to ₹ 1,25,64,214/-. 3. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r. Therefore, the ground no. 1 is dismissed and the ground no. 2 & 3 are partly allowed." 4. Now the department is in appeal against reducing the net profit by 1% as against 2% applied by the Assessing Officer and the assessee is in appeal against 1% retention. 5. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in controvery is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2008-09 wherein the Tribunal has accepted the net profit @ 5.39%. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that in the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 6. the net profit ratio comes to 4.88%, 4.42%, 5.42%, 5.39%, 5.28% and 5.75% and the Tribu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X