Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
These are the appeals filed by the assessee against separate orders of
CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, all dated 14.7.2016, for the assessment years 2009-
10, 2010-11 & 2011-12, respectively.
ITA No.364/CTK/2016 for A.Y. 2009-10:
In Ground No.1 of the appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the
CIT(A) erred in determining the net profit at 2% on the turnover, which is
unjustified and otherwise highly excessive .
2 ITA No s.364,365 & 366 /CT K/20 16 Asse ssme nt Y ear s :2 009 -10, 2010- 11 & 201 1-1 2
At the time of hearing, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that he is not
pressing this ground of appeal and also made an endorsement to this effect
to the grounds of appeal appended to Form No.36 of the appeal memo filed
before the Tribunal. Hence, same is dismissed as not pressed.
In Ground No.2 of the appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the
CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in making
addition of Rs.3,88,600/- as unexplained investment.
Ld A.R. of the assessee pointed out from the grounds of appeal
appended to Form No.35 in the appeal memo filed before the CIT(A) that
Ground No.4 raised before the CIT(A) reads as under:
“4. For that the addition of Rs.3,88,600/- as made under head “unexplained investment” is also arbitrary and unjustified.”
Ld A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated this ground of
appeal of the assessee. Ld D.R. also agreed with the above submission of ld
A.R. of the assessee.
In view of above submission of ld A.R. of the assessee, I restore this
issue back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating the above ground of appeal
of the assessee after allowing reasonable and proper opportunity of hearing
to the assessee.
3 ITA No s.364,365 & 366 /CT K/20 16 Asse ssme nt Y ear s :2 009 -10, 2010- 11 & 201 1-1 2
ITA Nos.465 & 466/CTK/2016 for A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12:
The sole ground of appeal raised by the assessee in both the years is
that the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the net profit as determined at
2% on the turnover.
At the time of hearing, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that he is not
pressing this ground of appeal for both the assessment years and also made
an endorsement to this effect to the grounds of appeal appended to Form
No.36 of the appeal memo filed before the Tribunal. Hence, this ground is
dismissed as not pressed for assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12.
In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2009-10 is partly allowed
for statistical purposes and the appeals for assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-
12, are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24/01/2017 in the presence of parties.
Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 24/01 /2017 B.K.Parida, SPS
4 ITA No s.364,365 & 366 /CT K/20 16 Asse ssme nt Y ear s :2 009 -10, 2010- 11 & 201 1-1 2
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Khusida Bibi, Ghantapada, New Fish Godown, Near Railway Station, Talcher. 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward-2, Amrakunja, Dhenkanal. 3. The CIT(A) Cuttack 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,
ASST.REGISTRAR, ITAT, Cuttack