SH. DURGA PARSAD THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR SMT. SAVITA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 45 (1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7210/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 September 2026AY 2012-122 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities estimated a high GP of 30% without considering market comparables for the auto spare parts business. Therefore, the Tribunal reduced the GP estimation to 5%, stating it should not be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the assessment year 2012-13, where cash deposits of Rs. 4,14,761 were subjected to a 30% Gross Profit (GP) estimation. The assessee contended that this estimation was excessive and lacked justification.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correctness of the GP estimation applied to the assessee's cash deposits without proper justification or comparison with market rates.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 18.08.2026Pronounced: 18.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 7210/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Late Sh. Durga Prasad Vs Income Tax Officer [through L/H Smt. Savita] Ward- 45(1), A-37, Shivaji Vihar, Janta Colony, New Delhi- 03 Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi-27 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AGKPP4585F Assessee by: Sh. T.C. Sachdeva, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Mangali Venkata Ramesh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 18.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 18.08.2026

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl. JCIT(A)-1 (for short, ‘CIT(A)’), Jaipur’s order dated 24.12.2025 passed in DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1084055872 (1) dated 24.12.2025, involving proceedings u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Delay of 128 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

2 3. It is evident at the outset during the course of hearing that the sole substantive issue raised at the assessee’s behest is that of correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ assessment and lower appellate findings subjecting his entire cash deposits/credits of Rs. 414761/- to a lumpsump GP estimation @ 30%.

4.

That being the case, it is made clear that there is much a dispute about the assessee, since deceased, was engaged in auto spare parts business etc. It is next noticed that both the learned lower authorities have simply estimated a much exorbitant GP estimation @ 30% without even discussing the corresponding market comparables in the aforesaid business as well. It is thus deem appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lumpsump GP estimation 5% in the assessee’s case would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. No other ground or arguments has been pressed.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.08.2026 .

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 22.09.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →