9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the assessee in the subsequent A.Y 2011-12 relate to the contract amount received in the A.Y 2010-11 and thereafter, in the event of assessee s failure to establish a direct nexus only, to enhance the amount to the extent of ₹ 6,38,691/. Therefore, no reason to interfere with this direction of the CIT (A). Assessee s appeal is dismissed. - ITA No. 1923/Hyd/2019 - - - Dated:- 22-4-2021 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member Assessee by : Sri K. Pandurangaiah Revenue by : Sri Subramanyam Tota, DR ORDER This is assessee s appeal for the A.Y 2010-11 against the order of the CIT (A)-6, Hyderabad, dated 25/10/2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee individual, carrying on contract business, f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se while upholding the contention of the Assessing Officer. (ii) The Hon'ble CIT Appeals has overlooked the detailed submissions made in the course of scrutiny to The Assistant Commissioner on 13-8-2012 (ii) later on change of jurisdiction to the Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Nellore on 18-12-2012 (iii) After preferring Appeal in the course of hearing of the Appeal submissions made before the Cl T Appeals also not looked in to. By misconstruing the entire facts of the case the addition was upheld. The Addition may be deleted. II. AO Estimated G.P at 6% ON THE SUB CONTRACT BILLS- ₹ 2.94.80.674/-.as against admitted Gross Profit of 4.52% Consequential Addition of Income ₹ 5.59.891/- Cl T CA) reduced the GP Addition fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithout issuing show-cause notice. addition made is unauthorized addition may be set aside. For these and other reasons as may be urged at the time of hearing of the Appeal the Addition made under different heads may be deleted . 3. As regards Grounds 1 2 against the estimation of income at 8% on main contracts and 5% on sub-contracts, I do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the CIT (A) as the CIT(A) has followed the precedents on the issue i.e. the decisions of the Tribunal which he has quoted in his order. Therefore, Grounds 1 and 2 are rejected. 4. As regards enhancement of the income by the CIT (A) to the extent of 6,38,691/- is concerned also, I find that the CIT (A) has directed the Assessing Officer to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
