9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Appellant, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Berhampur Circle, Berhampur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Revenue') in ITA No. 16/CTK/2014 by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 14.03.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Berhampur, Odisha qua the assessment year 2009-10 on the grounds inter alia that :- "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) was not justified in accepting the contention of the assessee and deleting Rs. 1,23,82,764/- out of the addition made by the AO on account of undisclosed sales of the assessee, when there was no evidence that expenses against the sales were not already claimed by the assessee." 3. The Appellant, M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... siness and thereby disallowing the claim of Remuneration to Partners. 2. For that the learned A.D. as-well-as the learned Commissioner should have accepted the contention of the appellant. 3. For that the learned Commissioner is not justified to confirm the view of the learned A.D. to determine the sum of Rs. 1,58,75,339/- as undisclosed sales. 4. For that the learned Commissioner is also not justified to apply 22% rate of profit to determine undisclosed income from the aforesaid undisclosed sales. 5. Briefly stated facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are: pursuant to the search and seizure operation conducted at the business as well as residential premises of the assessee on 21.01.2009, the return of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order contended that the entire addition has been made on the basis of estimation and guesswork by the AO and ld. CIT (A) has sustained the addition to the tune of Rs. 34,92,575/- again by estimating @ 22% adopted by the AO in M/s. Bhaskar Traders and considering the gross profit rate of 22% disclosed by the assessee in the profit & loss account for the assessment year under consideration. The ld. AR contended that the entire addition is liable to be deleted or in the alternative, net profit be applied on the alleged undisclosed sales in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in judgment cited as CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar - 263 ITR 610 (MP). 9. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be compared broadly with M/s. Bhaskar Traders which has shown gross profit @ 22%. So, keeping in view the net profit shown by the assessee in the earlier year @ 16%, we do not find any evidence on record to reach at the conclusion that in the next year, net profit is increased by 6%. So, in these circumstances, we find it appropriate to estimate the net profit @ 16% on the undisclosed sales of Rs. 1,58,75,339/-. 12. In view of what has been discussed above, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as assessee are partly allowed. 13. Cross objection filed by the assessee raising identical grounds as has been raised in appeal bearing no.IT(SS) A. No. 271/CTK/2014 by the assessee is hereby dismissed having been become infruc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
