9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... achan, Sri Binu Mathew, Sri Terry V James, Sri Tam Thomas JUDGEMENT:- PER : Shaffique, J. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the common assessee in respect of assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-2003 respectively. The common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A.No.671 of 2007 and 672 of 2007 are under challenge. 2. The assessee is a Commission Agent and he file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... came to be confirmed. 3. In respect of the assessment year 2002-03 also, on similar set of facts, assessment was made by the Assessing Officer fixing the total income at Rs. 12,08,000/-. 4. While challenging the aforesaid appellate orders, the Revenue has raised the following questions of law : i) whether the appellate authorities were justified in interfering with the estimated a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the sole basis for calculating business income is based on the previous year's assessment. Hence while adding Rs. 5,00,000/- to the income already declared and Rs. 10,00,000/- as unexplained investment, tax was levied by assessing the total income at Rs. 16,08,000/-. 6. The appellate authority, however, found that there was no basis for estimation of Rs. 5 lakhs during the assessment year 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained during the assessment year 2001-02 and 2002-03. True that the assessee had declared agency commission of Rs. 4 lakhs during the assessment year 2000-01. But agency commission is always a fluctuated matter and depends upon the commission on receipts for arranging a particular contract. In the absence of any material to indicate that the assessee had derived such commission and it was conceale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
