SAASTHA WAREHOUSING LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 756/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 June 2021AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that neither party considered relevant preceding or succeeding year profit results. Therefore, a lump sum estimation of 7.5% of total receipts was deemed just and proper, without setting a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the estimation of business income at 10% of total receipts by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). The assessee did not seek restoration of its rejected books of accounts but contested the quantification of estimated income.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correctness of the 10% estimation of business income. The Tribunal also directed consideration of carry forward of losses and depreciation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘ A ‘ BENCH, HYDERABAD.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao
For Respondent: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman (D.R.)
Hearing: 3.6.2021Pronounced: 14.06.2021

O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for Asst. Year 2014-15 arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Hyderabad’s order dt.21.03.2019 passed in case No.10402/CIT(A)-9, Hyd/2018-19 in Section 144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

With the able assistance of both the parties, we advert to the assessee's first and foremost substantive ground that the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) have erred in law and on facts in estimating 10% of its total receipts of Rs.5,82,73,617; coming to Rs.58,27,361 as business income in godowns. The assessee is fair enough in not seeking restoration of books of accounts which stood rejected during the course of assessment. Its only grievance is confined to the quantification of assessee's estimated income @ 10%.

3.

We stay on this quantification aspect as notice that neither the assessee filed all the relevant details of its corresponding business expenditure nor the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) have taken into consideration the relevant preceding assessment year 10%. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate that a lump sum estimation of 7.5% than that @ 10% in issue would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case. Needless to mention, the Assessing Officer is further directed to consider the assessee's claim(supra) of carry forward of losses as well as depreciation; as per law in consequential proceedings. The assessee shall also file all necessary details relevant thereto; at its own risk and responsibility.

4.

This assessee's appeal is partly allowed, in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 14th June,2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →