M/S. R.K. AGRO PRODUCTS,DHULE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE- DHULE, DHULE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the assessee's audited books of account and stock register were not rejected, there was no justification for estimating the gross profit based on previous years' figures.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a food grain trading firm, declared a lower gross profit percentage in the current year compared to previous years. The AO made an ad hoc addition for this fall, which was restricted by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the ad hoc addition to the income based on a fall in gross profit percentage was justified when the audited books of account were not rejected.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Not explicitly mentioned
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :
This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22-07-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [„CIT(A)‟] for assessment year 2015-16.
The only ground is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in confirming the ad hoc addition to an extern of Rs.3,50,000/- in the facts and circumstances of the case.
We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. The assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to hear ld. DR and pass order basing on material available on record.
Heard ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The assessee is a firm engaged in the business of trading in food grains. The assessee declared total income of Rs.2,36,94,540/- and in scrutiny the AO added Rs.7,00,000/- on account of ad hoc addition for not substantiating fall in gross profit.
We note that the assessee filed books of account and stock register. The said books of account are audited. The contention of AO is that the gross profit declared by the assessee is much below than the gross profit declared for A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2013-14 and for not substantiating fall in the gross profit compared to A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2013-14, he added Rs.7,00,000/- on the basis of estimation. The CIT(A) restricted the addition to 50%. We find that the assessee declared gross profit @ 10.34% and 8.61% for A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2013-14, respectively whereas the current year he declared only 6.12%, in our opinion there was no finding by the AO against the books of account and stock register and even the books of account for not rejected by the authorities below. Therefore, when books of account and stock register filed and when the same were audited in the absence of any objection regarding the same, we find no substance in estimating the gross profit, having comparison to A.Ys. 2014-15 and 2013-14. Thus, the order of CIT(A) is not justified and it is set aside. The only ground raised by the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd August, 2020.
Sd/- Sd/- (R.S. Syal) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 03rd August, 2020. RK आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Nashik 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Nashik ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एक सदस्य मामऱा” बेंच, 5. ऩुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. 6. //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
तनजी सधचव / Private Secretary, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026