ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. UNITED INDIA CONSTRUCTION & COMMUNICATION PVT. LTD., DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 9,167,043/-. The CIT(A) had estimated the profit at 25% of the turnover after finding the assessee non-cooperative.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 14,190,746/- on account of sundry creditors. The CIT(A) restricted this addition to Rs. 9,167,043/-. The revenue appealed against the reduction in the addition.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in reducing the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained sundry creditors, and if the estimation of profit by the CIT(A) was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S.SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-22, New Delhi dated 21.08.2015 for the Assessment Year 2010-11 raising solitary ground of appeal as under:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld CIT(A) has erred in reducing the addition of Rs. 14190746/- to Rs. 9167043/- made by AO on account of S. Creditors.”
2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of civil contractor who filed its return of income on 15.10.2010 declaring income of Rs. 359318/-. The assessment u/s 144 of the Act was passed on 15.03.2013 determining total income of the assessee at Rs. 15052851/-. The main addition was made on account of sundry creditors of Rs. 14190746/-. On appeal before the ld CIT(A) the addition was restricted to Rs. 9167043/- and therefore, against the relief granted by the ld CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal.
3. The ld ld Departmental Representative submitted that assessee has not given any details before the ld Assessing Officer and therefore, at the end of the year creditors of the assessee were Rs. 19150158/- compared to Rs. 4959412/- in the beginning of the year and therefore, the addition of Rs. 14190746/- is added. It was further stated that despite repeated opportunities none appeared on behalf of the assessee to provide this information. The ld CIT(A) on the same set of facts has deleted the part of the addition. She referred to para No. 7 of the order of the ld CIT(A) and stating that addition cannot be deleted determining the profit of the assessee.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026