FAIZ MOHAMMAD,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), MUZAFFARNAGAR

This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the Ld.
CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar, Delhi in Appeal No. 111/16-17/MZR dated 13.11.2017. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records.
3. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR has submitted that AO has erred in computing the total income at Rs. 20,89,160/- by estimating the Net Profit @9.09% of the total turnover as against the declared income of Rs. 1,99,540/-. It was further submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the adhoc estimated the net profit @8% of 2
total turnover, which is unjust and very excessive and not based on any material on record. It was further submitted that CIT(A) rejected the books of accounts of the assessee without appreciating that the AO has not rejected the books of accounts.
4. Ld. DR vehemently argues during the course of hearing that Ld.
CIT(A) after considering all the material facts and circumstances sustained the estimation of net profit @ 8% by upholding the addition of Rs. 18,32,000/- which deserve to be upheld.
5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s contention made in the grounds of appeal and Revenue’s foregoing vehement contentions. I am of the considered view that neither party’s submissions herein deserve to be accepted in entirety as the assessee on the one hand has not been pleaded and prove his claim of net profit nor the department could draw any comparable in the very line of business for estimating the net profit @8%. I therefore deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to assess the assessee’s foregoing turnover to a lump sum estimated net profit @4% in lieu of @8% with a rider that the same shall not be 3
treated as a precedent. Learned AO shall finalize his computation in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
6. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30.09.2025. (MAHAVIR SINGH)

VICE PRESIDENT
Date: 30-09-2025

SRBhatnaggar