TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of M/s. Balaji Wines vs. ITO [ 2018 (10) TMI 1944 - ITAT HYDERABAD] Tribunal directed the AO to estimate the net profit @ 3% of the cost of goods put to sale. - I.T.A. Nos.14 And 15/Viz/2020 - - - Dated:- 8-4-2022 - Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon ble Judicial Member And Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon ble Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sri G.V.N. Hari, AR For the Respondent : Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR ORDER PER BENCH: Both the captioned appeals are filed by the assesseee. Since these appeals pertain to the same assessee and one AY 2013-14, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed off in this consolidated order. ITA No.14/Viz/2020 2. This appeal is filed against the order of the Ld. CIT (A), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rved that though the assessee had been given sufficient opportunities, the assessee failed to furnish the details for expenses claimed in the P L Account as well as the stock register which is subjected to periodical checks by the Excise Officials. Considering the assessee s failure to furnish the requisite details and in the absence of bills and vouchers in support of the expenses debited to the P L Account for verification, the Ld. AO rejected the books of account of the assessee and estimated the profit of the assessee @ 5% on stock put to sale by the assessee which worked out to ₹ 15,27,292/- and added the same to the total income of the assessee. In the assessment made U/s. 143(3) of the Act, the Ld. AO also made addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 with regard to the estimation of income, we find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee, as submitted by the Ld. AR, wherein the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Balaji Wines vs. ITO in ITA No.1050/Hyd/2018, dated 24/10/2018 the Tribunal directed the AO to estimate the net profit @ 3% of the cost of goods put to sale. For the sake of reference, the relevant portion of the Hyderabad Tribunal s order is reproduced herein below for reference: 4. As regards grounds 1 and 2 with regard to estimation of income, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Tribunal wherein we have upheld the estimation of income at 3% of the cost of goods put to sale. The relevant p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilar business. Estimation of net profit must be on the basis of facts involved in each and every case. Therefore, in our view, there is no error committed by the AU in estimating the profit at 2.5% of the total turnover. Thus grounds of appeal No.2 3 are allowed. 5.1. In the case before us, the assessee is agreeable to the estimation of income at 3% of the cost of goods sold. As the facts before us are similar to the facts before the Tribunal in the case of Venkateswara W ines, Nizamabad (supra) and the uniform rate of profit cannot be adopted in the case of every assessee in similar business, we allow ground No.2 of the assessee . 5. Respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench (to which both of us are signatori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
