BABY TALUKDAR, L/R OF LAKHI KANTA TALUKDAR,BARPETA ROAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BARPETA ROAD & TPS, BARPETA ROAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 165/GTY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 October 2019AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal reduced the estimated gross profit rate from 8% to 7.5% due to the lack of comparative analysis by the lower authorities. This reduction was made in the interest of justice and not to be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a retail seller of Indian Made Foreign Liquor, could not verify their expenses. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) estimated gross profit at 8% on total sales without a comparative chart of preceding and succeeding years.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of gross profit by the lower authorities was justified without considering comparative data from other assessment years.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AD,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH “SMC” GUWAHATI

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Guwahati’s order dated 31.01.2019 passed in case No.609352791020217/423, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The assessee’s only grievance raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse the lower authorities’ action estimating gross profit @8% on the total sales turnover of Rs.1,80,55,800/- as per section 44AD of the Act.

ITA No.165/Gau/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 Baby Talaukdar Vs. ITO Wd-Barpeta Road & TPS Page 2

3.

There is hardly any dispute that this assessee is a retail seller of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL). And also that the assessee could not get his corresponding expenses verified by producing all necessary details. Learned Departmental Representative fails to dispute the clinching fact that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) have drawn any comparative chart of assessee’s gross profits in preceding as well as succeeding assessment years before arriving at the impugned estimation. I therefore deem it appropriate to reduce the assessee’s gross profit rate from 8% to 7.5% in the larger interest of justice with a rider the same shall not be treated as precedent in other assessment year.

4.

This assessee's appeal is partly allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(3) of the ITAT Rules by putting on Notice Board on 10/10/2019 (S.S. Godara) Judicial Member Gauhati, *Dkp/Sr.PS "दनांकः- 10/10/2019 आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-Baby Talukdar (L/r Lakhi Kanta Talukdar Howly Town Ward No.4 Howly, Barpeta Road, Assam-781315

2.

""यथ"/Respondent-ITO, Ward-Barpeta Road & TPS Assam Guwahati-781005 3. संबं&धत आयकर आयु'त गृवाहाठ, / Concerned CIT Guwahati 4. आयकर आयु'त- अपील / CIT (A)-2 Guwahati 5. -वभागीय "/त/न&ध, आयकर अपील"य अ&धकरण गृवाहाठ, / DR, ITAT, Guwahati 6. गाड1 फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // Sr. Private Secretary (on Tour) आयकर अपील"य अ&धकरण, गूवाहाठ" ।

More judgments on Section 44AD

All 2,222 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AD →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →