TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mittedly, the appellant has not maintained the stock register and quantitative tally is not being made. Further, the assessee has also not shown the interest derived from FDR to the tune of ₹ 1,93,893/- as well as the lease rent of ₹ 1,52,590/- so received from leasing out of JCB machines. Once it has been found that the assessee has not voluntarily maintained its books of account, as required under the Act, the books of account have rightly been rejected and the net profit, which has been fixed at 8%, is quite reasonable. Moreover, all the authorities below have rejected the contention of the appellant. At this stage, no substantial question of law arises in the present appeal. - Decided against assessee. - Income Tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come from FDR and rental income from JCB as income other than business income for the assessment year in question? The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant is a civil contractor engaged in execution of works contract with Agra Development Authority, Agra. The present appeal relates to the Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee filed its returns showing net profit of ₹ 42,62,972/-, which gives net profit @ 5.09% on gross receipt of ₹ 8,37,12,896/-. The appellant has earned interest on FDR and JCB machines amounting to ₹ 3,46,883/-, the total income being ₹ 46,09,455/-. The appellant filed its return on 10.09.2012 showing total income of ₹ 44,95,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, difference of ₹ 24,34,060/- (₹ 70,43,515 46,09,455/-) disallowed out of expenses and added back in his total income. This disallowance also includes ₹ 4,88,222/- u/s 40(a)(ia) on non deduction of tax payment of M/s Agra Development Authority as interest and any other possible disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) or 40A(3). Assessee is agree for the same vide order sheet entry dated 22.01.2014. Penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act is being issued separately for concealment furnishing of inaccurate particulars in income. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid assessment order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Agra, who vide order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment proceedings. We also find that the ld. CIT (A) has not applied the provisions of section of section 44AD of the Act, rather he had justified the assessee's admission of 8% NP rate before the A.O. With the support of judicial pronouncements, wherein net profit rate ranges from 8% to 13% in the cases of civil contractors. Thus, the ld. CIT (A) considered the facts and circumstances of the case that the assessee has admitted NP of 8% in compliance to show cause issued by the A.O. during the course of assessment proceedings and that subsequently, retraction in appeal is irrelevant on account of conditional admission, because the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, does not change the basic fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grieved by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the assessee has preferred the present appeal. It has been argued by the counsel for the appellant that at the time of assessment proceedings, the assessee has given consent for acceptance of 8% of gross net profit only with a condition that no penal action shall be taken against him and therefore, when the penalty proceedings were initiated, he retracted with his consent. He further submits that the appellant has produced all books of account before the authorities below, but the same have wrongly been rejected. It is further submitted that since the nature of the business of the assessee is of the works contractor and in many cases, the payment has to be made in cash, for wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
