9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TA No.2595/Kol/2019 for the assessment year 2013- 14. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : "I) Whether the Income Tax Authority has the authority to assume the percentage of gross profit of an assessee on being unsatisfied as to the correctness of the accounts? II) Whether the decision of the Income Tax Authority in summarily reducing the percentage of gross profit of the assessee is perverse, contrary to and without authority of law?" We have heard Mr. Mainak Bose, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee and Mr. Amit Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/revenue. The short question involved in the instant case is whether the percentage of gross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and has got swayed away by his own approach, so much so, that he has ignored evidences furnished by the appellant during the assessment proceedings. I find that he was incorrect in concluding that the appellant's business did not exist at all. He also erred in holding that there is were no purchases or sales and that all that had been presented by the appellant was a mere hog wash to claim the exemption u/s 80IC of the Act. To this extent, the ld. AO's conclusions are found to be incorrect and are rejected". After having come to such a conclusion, the CIT(A) proceeded to examine as to whether the claim of gross profit made by the assessee at 57.01 per cent was justified or not. The CIT(A)took note of certain details as well as the gross p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessing officer is incorrect, would point out that the finding of the assessing officer was on presumptions and that he ignored the evidences furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. If such was the conclusion of the CIT(A), the question would be whether the books could have been rejected under Section 145(3) of the Act. This inconsistency also has led to a decision by the CIT(A) which is also based on certain presumptions or the opinion of the CIT(A). It appears that the assessee was not put on specific notice that the gross profit should have been determined at 40 per cent qua their claim of gross profit at 57.01 per cent. Thus, the best course that should have been adopted by the CIT(A) was to remand the matter ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
