9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity). 2. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in perversely finding that earlier and subsequent returns filed by the Assessee would not give true and clear picture of the income of the Appellant since there are multiple variables, such as, turnover, expenditure and location of the business of the Appellant, more particularly, in spite of the fact that there is no change in nature of business and scrutiny assessment for A.Y. 2012-13 had computed the net profit at 3.21% of the Gross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 2012-13 and also a comparative chart for the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. After taking note of the facts and figures placed before him, the CIT(A) took note of the decision of the Tribunal in M/s.V M Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward I (3), Trichy in ITA.No.1703/Mds/2009 and also took note of the assessment orders passed for the earlier years and fixed the gross profit at 3.5%, holding the same to be reasonable. 7. The Revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal and the assessee also filed a cross objection. The Tribunal, applied the decision in A.Vajjiram & Bros., and fixed the gross profit at 8%. 8. On a reading of paragraph 6 of the impugned order, we find that the Tribunal did not find fault w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xed as income on the eligible assessees who are defined under clause (a) Explanation and eligible business defined under Clause (b) Explanation, so long as the gross turnover does not exceed Rs. 40 lakhs, the income would be assessed at the specified percentage of the gross turnover. There is no denial of the fact, as is evident from the order of assessment that the assessee's gross contract receipt was Rs. 4,02,10,611/- for the assessment year 2006- 2007 and Rs. 5,34,96,995/- for the assessment year 2007-2008, which means, Section 44 AD of the Act has no relevance. 7. As far as this case is concerned, it is a matter of record and it is not disputed by the assessee that it had not filed any profit and loss account or the balance sheet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taxing the assessee on a presumptive basis. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) accepted the contention of the assesseee that it was an assessment under Section 44 AD of the Act. 8. Before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee submitted that the total income of the assessee was not exceeding 4% at anytime in the preceding year when the turnover was low and that high percent of net profit in the assessment year 2006-07 was not possible when the turnover was high i.e. above Rs. 4 Crores. It was further submitted by the assessee that the nature of business was such that they had to face lot of practical difficulties in maintaining the bills and vouchers and considering the quality maintenance in civil work, the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
