TRISTAR HOSPITALITIES,SHIVAJI MARG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that only the net profit on unrecorded business receipts, not the entire amount, should be added to the assessee's income. The CIT(A)'s decision to add 10% net profit was considered appropriate in view of the competitive nature of the business.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a hospitality firm, faced additions to its income based on unrecorded business receipts found during a search operation. The Assessing Officer made additions of Rs. 71,000 and Rs. 23,58,400. The CIT(A) sustained these additions to the extent of Rs. 2,42,940, representing a 10% net profit on the unaccounted receipts.
What were the issues?
Whether the entire unrecorded business receipts or only the net profit thereon should be added to the assessee's income. The appropriateness of the net profit rate applied by the CIT(A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” DELHI
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 26, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 30.06.2023 arising from the assessment order dated 08.10.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) concerning A.Y. 2019-20 in question.
In the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee placed written submissions, which read as under: Appellant is a firm formed on 27.09.2014 having 3 partners namely (1) Sh. Sanjeev Kohli (50% share) (2) Sh. Sunit Goyal (25% Share) and (3) Sh. Gagandeep Sahni (25% Share).
A search and seizure operation was carried out by the income tax department at the premises of the partners and other businesses connected with the partners on 03.05.2018 The appellant e-filed the return of income on 22.10.2019 at a total income of Rs.7,68,410/- During the course of search certain documents were found and seized from the premises of the partners which were stated to be related to the appellant firm and were handed over to the Id. AO on 09.02.2021 and consequently the assessment proceeding were initiated in the case of the assessee under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act. The assessment order was passed in this case under section 143(3) of the Act on 08.10.2021 making following additions: o Addition on account of unrecorded business receipts of Rs. 71,000 on the basis of Hard Disk found from the premises of Ritz Banquets o Addition on account of unrecorded business receipts of Rs. 23,58,400/- on the basis of images retrieved from the phone of Sh. Sanjeev Kohli (partner) The appellant filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against the additions made by ld. AO and an order under section 250 was passed on 30.06.2023. The ld. CIT (A) sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 2,42,940/- being net profit @ of 10% of unaccounted business receipts of Rs. 24,29,400/- (Rs. 71,000/- + Rs. 23,58,400/-) made by the learned AO in the assessment order. The learned CIT(A) in paragraph 7.2.6 of his order has held as under:- "7.2.6 In view of the above facts and submissions by the appellant, I am of the view that only net profit of the out of books sales can be added to the income of the appellant. In the appellant's line of business which is a very competitive one and considering the net profit earned by M/s Fourstar Hospitalities computed on the basis of unaccounted receipts and expenditure account found during the course of search and the discussion made in Para 7.2.4 above. I find it appropriate to consider the Net Profit of the appellant @10% of the unaccounted receipts added to the total income by the AO considering the seized material. The AO has made additions of Rs. 24,29,400/- (Rs. 71,000/- + Rs.23,58,400/-) on account of unrecorded business receipts which has been considered as income of the appellant assessee instead of net profit on unrecorded business receipts. Thus, in view of the above, the net profit of Rs. 2,42,940/- (i.e. 10% of 24,29,400/-) should have been added to the total income of the appellant.
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026