SHRI NAYAN JYOTI TALUKDAR,BARPETA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- BARPETA ROAD, BARPETA

ITA 3/GTY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 October 2019AY 2014-153 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that neither lower authority conducted a comparative analysis of profit rates in earlier or later years. While the assessee failed to provide supporting evidence for book results, the Tribunal reduced the estimated gross profit rate from 8% to 7.5% to meet the ends of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenges the estimation of business income at 8% of total turnover by the lower authorities. The Revenue's contention was that the assessee failed to prove expenditures recorded in the books of account.

What were the issues?

Whether the estimation of business income by the Assessing Officer was justified without comparative analysis and proper evidence. The appropriateness of the estimated profit rate on civil contract business.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH “SMC” GUWAHATI

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Guwahati’s order dated 28.09.2018 passed in case No. 606966231310117/190, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Case called twice. None appeared at assessee’s behest. I proceed ex parte against the assessee in the instant appeal 2. The assessee’s only grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the lower authorities action estimating his business income @ 8% of the total turnover / receipts of ₹4,89,84,499/-, coming to ₹32,00,240/- in civil contract business. The Revenue’s only case is that since the assessee could not prove the relevant expenditure recorded in the books of account, the Assessing Officer

ITA No.03/Gau/2019 A.Y .2014-15 Sri Nayana Jyoti Talukdar Vs. ITO Wd-Barpeta Road & TPS Page 2 rejected his book result followed by estimation of the impugned income element. I find that neither of the lower authority has drawn a comparative analysisof the corresponding profit rate in assessee’s case in earlier or latter assessment years. The fact also remains that the assessee has failed to explain all the book results by way of supportive evidence. I therefore deem it appropriate in these peculiar circumstances that the impugned gross profit element @ 7.5% than 8% would meet the ends of justice with a rider that same shall not be treated as a precedent in any other assessment year. 3. 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 10/10/2019 Sd/- (S.S. Godara) Judicial Member Guwahati, *Dkp/Sr.PS "दनांकः- 10/10/2019 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant-Sri Nayan Jyoti Talaukdar, C/o Pradip Talukdar, Sorbhog Town, Ward No.3, Barpeta-781317 2. ��यथ�/Respondent-Income Tax Officer, Ward-Barpeta Road & TPS Pini-781317 3. संबं&धत आयकर आयु'त गृवाहाठ, / Concerned CIT Guwahati 4. आयकर आयु'त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. -वभागीय �/त/न&ध, आयकर अपील�य अ&धकरण गृवाहाठ, / DR, ITAT, Guwahati 6. गाड1 फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, /True Copy/ Sr. Private Secretary (on Tour) आयकर अपील�य अ&धकरण, गूवाहाठ� ।

ITA No.03/Gau/2019 A.Y .2014-15 Sri Nayana Jyoti Talukdar Vs. ITO Wd-Barpeta Road & TPS Page 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →