9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d no. 1 of the assessee is dismissed. Undisclosed profit from contract work and transport income - HELD THAT:- The assumptions made by Ld. AO are without any basis, on the contrary the basis adopted by the Ld. AO was itself conflicting at places when the percentage of profit was calculated on the basis of turnover in 26AS, but have presumed that the turnover shown in 26AS was not considered by the assessee in the returned income, Ld. AO also presumed that the deemed profit u/s 44AE was not included in the profit shown by the assessee in ITR was again on the basis of presumption without any concrete evidence. Thus having no further information or decision contradicting the submissions and contentions of the Ld. AR, we find no basis to approve both the additions made by the Ld. AO, thus, we direct to delete the same. In result ground no. 2 3 of the assessee s appeal are allowed. - SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM For the Assessee : Shri Y.K. Mishra, Adv. For the Revenue : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR ORDER Per Arun Khodpia, AM: The captioned Appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Brief facts of the case culled out from the records are that assessee is an Individual, proprietor of M/S Jai Crusher Industries which is engaged in the business of transportation, contract work and hiring /renting of JCB Machine etc. On the basis of audited accounts, the assessee has filed its return of income on 30.03.2017 declaring total income at Rs. 9,52,570/-. The case has been selected for scrutiny under CASS and the Id. Assessing Officer has issued notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. That the Id. Assessing Officer has assessed the income u/s 143(3) at Rs. 20,14,290/- making addition of Rs. 6,48,328/- on account of undisclosed income u/s 44AD and Id. AO has taken net profit rate @ 37%. Further, the Id. AO has applied section 44AE of the Act and made addition of Rs. 3,60,000/- on account of transportation income. The Id. AO has not accepted the submission filed by the assessee and made addition. Against the above-mentioned addition, the assessee has filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Bilaspur (C.G.), however, as apparent that in response to notice u/s 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 the assessee has not filed his submission, therefore, the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee, therefore, it cannot be said that the Ld. AO have examined the issues beyond his jurisdiction as conferred upon him under the limited scrutiny mandate. Under such facts and circumstances ground no. 1 of the assessee is dismissed. 7. Ground no. 2 3: Regarding confirming the addition of Rs. 6,48328 on account of undisclosed profit from contract work and Rs. 3,60,000/- on account of transport income. 7.1 At the outset regarding this ground Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee has submitted that during the year under consideration the assessee who is engaged in the business of contract work and during the year under consideration have receipts of Rs. 17,52,237/- where upon a profit of Rs. 6,45,462/- was declared u/s 44AD, which is higher than the presumptive rate of deemed profit i.e., 8 % as mandate in the provisions of section 44AD. The figure of Rs.17,52,237/-, comprises of contractual receipts from M/s Aditya contructions and M/s Shankar Brothers for Rs. 14,62,245/- and 2,90,000/-, respectively, such figures are duly evident from form 26AS of the assessee. Ld. AO has mis construed the amounts from the ITR of the assessee wherein the net profit shown includes pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee is engaged in two categories of business i.e., business of contract work and transportation. Both these activities of the assessee are undoubtedly, covered by the provisions of section 44AD and 44AE, respectively. Assessee s income from contract business was for Rs.17,52,245/- is duly backed by the details available in form 26AS of the assessee. Apart from contractual receipts the assessee has receipt of Rs. 94,31,293/- from transport business, this fact is also acknowledged and accepted by the Ld. AO as emerging from the observations in para 5 of the assessment order. The net profit of the assessee includes deemed income of Rs.3,60,000/- from transport business has not believed by the Ld. AO, also since the assessee has not claimed TDS on contractual receipts in the ITR, Ld. AO have presumed that the entire receipt of Rs.17,52,245/- on which profit u/s 44AD was to be offered for tax, has not taken into consideration by the assessee, therefore, the profit @37% arrived at on the basis of profit offered by the assessee for Rs.6,45,462/- on the receipt of Rs.17,52,245/-. It is incomprehensible to admit that when the Ld. AO himself has drawn the percentage of profit s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
