2009 (11) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ob to the subcontractors. We have already seen that the practice of subletting of contractor was common and the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that payments made to subcontractors may be allowed as a deduction – held that - . In the present case, the Tribunal has referred to material justifying deduction. In view thereof, the Tribunal was right in permitting the deduction. – Decided in favor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on account of payments made to sub-contractors. In absence of evidence to substantiate the said payments, the Assessing Officer made assessment by applying net profit rate of 10% of the contract receipts, disallowing deduction of the amount said to have been paid by him to sub-contractors. This view was upheld by CIT (A) but the Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee by observing that the asse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t clear that the assessee did assign certain job to the subcontractors. We have already seen that the practice of subletting of contractor was common and the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that payments made to subcontractors may be allowed as a deduction. We find that ground No. 2 must succeed. The A.O. is directed to deduct Rs. 6,20,000/- from total contract receipts." 3. We have heard l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X