ANUJ JAIN,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD 1(1)(1), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9124/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 January 2026AY 2022-23Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the assessee's audited profit rates ranging between 3.94% to 5.33% in subsequent years. In the interest of justice, a lump sum net profit estimation of 7% was deemed appropriate for the assessee's case, with the caveat that it should not be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2022-23 arose against an order passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core issue was the correctness of the lower authorities' action in assessing/estimating the assessee's net profit in his timber business at 20% instead of the declared 6.17%.

What were the issues?

Correctness of net profit estimation in the timber business.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Adv. &
Hearing: 29.01.2026Pronounced: 29.01.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2022-23 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081622510(1) dated 10.10.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It transpires during the course of hearing that the sole substantive issue between the parties is that of correctness of both the lower authorities’ action assessing/estimating the assessee’s NP in timber business etc. @20% than that @ 6.17% declared in his computation.

1.

Anuj Jain 4. That being the only issue, learned counsel has invited the tribunal’s attention to the assessee’s profit rate(s) ranging between 3.94% to 5.33% in the succeeding three assessment years as per his audited books. Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, it is deemed appropriate that a lump sum NP estimation @7% in the assessee’s case would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →