What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed a coordinate bench decision which held 3% profit estimation reasonable for similar businesses. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was directed to adopt 3% of the cost of goods sold as income.

The assessee, engaged in the IMFL business, did not maintain proper books of account. The Assessing Officer estimated profit at 5% on the cost of goods sold, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the estimation of income for an assessee who failed to maintain proper books of accounts for their IMFL business.

Narsingraj Chermani vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD “SMC” BENCH, HYDERABAD

For Appellant: Shri B. Shanthi Kumar-Adv

For Respondent: Mr. Nilanjan Dey – DR

Hearing: 15/05/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “SMC” BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1924/HYD/2018 (Asst. Year : 2014-15) Narsing Raj Chermani, vs. ITO, Ward-9(2), H.No. 18-7-179/5/4, Outside Hyderabad. Gowlipura, Hyderabad. PAN No. ADXPC 4817 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri B. Shanthi Kumar-Adv. Department By : Mr. Nilanjan Dey – DR Date of hearing : 15/05/2019. Date of pronouncement : 17/05/2019. O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Hyderabad, dated 19/09/2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The only issue involved in this appeal is estimation of income. 3. In this case, the Assessing Officer has estimated the profit of the assessee at 5% on the cost of goods sold, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 4. Before me, ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ITAT, Hyderabad ‘B' Bench in the case of Yadagiri Kummari vs. ITO in ITA No. 2035/HYD/2018, dated 30/01/2019 has consistently held that estimation of profit at 3% in IMFL business carried by the assessee is reasonable.

2 ITA No.1924/HYD/2018 (Narsingraj Chermani)

Ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the orders passed by the authorities below. 6. I have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. 7. The assessee is carrying IMFL business, but not maintained proper books of account, bills & vouchers. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has estimated the profit of the assessee at 5% on the cost of goods sold, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). Under the similar lines of business, the coordinate bench of Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Yadagiri Kummari (supra) directed the Assessing Officer to adopt 3% of the cost of goods sold as income of the assessee. Therefore, respectfully following the above referred to decision, I direct the Assessing Officer to adopt 3% of the cost of goods of liquor sold as the income of the assessee. Thus, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 17th day of May, 2019. Sd/- (V. DURGA RAO) Judicial Member Dated: 17th May, 2019. vr/-

3 ITA No.1924/HYD/2018 (Narsingraj Chermani)

Copy to: 1. The Assessee - Narsing Raj Chermani, H.No. 18-7- 179/5/4, Outside Gowlipura, Hyderabad. 2. The Revenue-ITO, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad. 3. The Pr.CIT-7, Hyderabad. 4. The CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad. 5. The D.R., Hyderabad. 6. Guard file. By order

Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Hyderabad.

NARSINGRAJ CHERMANI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(2), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments