2023 (10) TMI 1395

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 20.03.2018 for assessment year (AY) 2007-08. 2. Rival submissions of learned authorised representative (AR) for the assessee and the learned Senior departmental representative (Sr DR) for the revenue heard and record perused. The ld AR for the assessee submits that he has raised two fold grounds of appeal and accordingly have two fold submissions. On primary and first of grounds of appeal the assessee has challenged the validity of notice which was issued by assessing officer in a mechanical manner, without recording the satisfaction, if the notice was foe concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Thus, in absence of spec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... relied on the following decisions; (A) On the validity of notice; ► Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh Vs DCIT 15 taxmann.com 253 (Bom HC), ► PCIT Vs Basanti Property (P) Ltd 114 taxmann.com 541 (SC), ► CIT Vs SSA's Emerald Meadow 73 taxman.com 248-SC, ► Paresh Surathiya Vs ITO ITA no. 342/Srt/ 2018. (B) On the submissions of estimated additions; ► Manish Dhiraj Lal Munjal Vs ACIT in Tax Appeal No. 461 & 462 of 2000, ► ITO Vs Bomayawala Readymade Stores (55 taxmann.com 258 Bom), ► Nazar Inmex Pvt Limited Vs ITO In ITA No. 132 &133/SRT/ 2021 and ► ACIT Vs Shivam Project (97 taxmann.com 88 (Surat Trib). 4. On the other hand, the ld Sr DR for the revenue supported the order of lower autho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upheld by ld CIT(A), which is impugned before this Tribunal. 6. We find that on further appeal in quantum assessment before Tribunal the disallowances / additions of impugned purchase were restricted to 5% of the disputed purchases in ITA No. 2926/Ahd/ 2016, vide order dated 25.07.2019. Thus, we find that ultimately the addition was restricted to 5% being average profit ratio in the industry. Such disallowance was restricted by following decisions of various benches of Tribunal and by following some decisions of jurisdictional High Court. In our considered view the addition was ultimately restricted by Tribunal on ad hoc to the extent of average profit ratio. 7. We find this combination in Nazar Impex P Ltd (supra) while considering the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X