CGT v. A. Vajjram Bros.

326 ITR 551High Court#17665 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 133A Section 143(1)Section 145 Section 145(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 250

Judgments citing CGT v. A. Vajjram Bros.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Smt Rajpriyam, Rajapalayam

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2047/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2047/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Smt. Rajpriyam The Dcit, Non-Corporate Circle-2, 506-C, Thenkasi Road, Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. [Pan: Arzpr-4762-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Clement Ramesh Kumar,CITFor Respondent: Mr. R.Venkata Raman, CA

Section 250Section 68

…l to justify expenses, therefore, he rejected the books of accounts of the assessee estimated net profit/income of the assessee at 8% of the total receipts by relying on the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CGT Vs. A.Vajjram Bros. (326 ITR 551) (Mad) and thus made an addition of Rs.1,63,82,985/- i.e., 8% of Rs.20,47,87,318/-. Thereafter, Mrs. Rajpriyam :: 6 :: he made separate addition u/s.68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act towards sundry creditors of Rs.4, 87, 51,001/- and unsecured loan of Rs.60 lakhs u/s.68 of the Act. 9. Thus, the AO made the following additions: 1. Addition of Rs.1,6…

M S Veerappan, Namakkal vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Namakkal

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 923/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.923/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri M.S. Veerappan, Income Tax, Circle 1, No. 66/4, Avaramkattu Pudur, Namakkal Melsathampur Post, Namakkal 637 206. [Pan:Aczpv7899M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T.S. Subramaniam, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

For Appellant: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Subramaniam, FCA

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 44A

…. Further the Assessing Officer has noted that the wage expenses and jalli expenses contribute to 50% of total receipts and moreover, 50% of his total expenses claimed based on self-made vouchers. In view of the decision in the case of CGT v. A. Vajjram Bros. 326 ITR 551 (Mad), the Assessing Officer has estimated the net profit at ₹.1,40,26,683/- being 8% of the gross contract receipts of ₹.17,52,08,538/- and brought to tax. On appeal, after considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to adopt net profit at 4%. 3. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribu…

Subhash Construction Co., Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 3, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1976/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Ravish Soodm/S. Subhash Construction Co. Acit, Circle - 3 4, Krishnanjali Building 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion Vs. Tai Pingle Chowk, Dombivali (E) Murbad Road, Thane 421201 Kalyan (W) 421301 Pan – Abpfs5505E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya

Section 131Section 40Section 44A

…14. Taking cue from the provisions of Section 44AD of the Act, the AO took the view that the income of the assessee should be estimated at 8% of the gross receipts. The AO also noticed that the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CGT vs. A. Vajjram Bros. 326 ITR 551 has accepted the estimate of 8% in the case of gross receipts of income of the assessee. Accordingly the AO estimated the net profit @ 8% of the gross receipts determined the net profit of the assessee from contract works at `188.73 lakhs. Further, the AO also assessed the interest income of Rs.12.06 lakhs separately under the head income from ot…

ACIT, Tirunelveli vs. T.Chinnaramasivan, Tirunelveli

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical

ITA 1162/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: None

Section 115BSection 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

…to Income-tax proceedings and hence decision taken in a particular year is not binding in a subsequent year. 6. The CIT(A) failed to note the judgement of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. A. Vajjram and Bros (Tax case Appeal No. 1266 of 2008) (326 ITR 551) wherein it is held that estimation of 8% of the contract receipts is judicious and requires no interference. 7. The CIT(A) failed to consider the fact that the assessee offered no explanation about the cash deposits in a saving bank account. The CIT(A) ought to have given reasonable opportunity to the AO as per rule 46A of the I.T. Rules 1962 to…

ACIT Circle 2, Salem vs. K.Rajagopalan & Co., Salem

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1537/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Ms.S.Vijayaprabha,JCIT,DRFor Respondent: Mr.G.Baskar,Advocate

Section 144Section 44A

…assessee firm is not maintaining any wages register or labour attendance register. As nearly 50% of the expenditure were supported only by self made vouchers, the AO rejected the books of accounts. Hence, the Madras High Court decision CGT vs. A.Vajjram Bros (326 ITR 551)(Mds.) squarely cover the issue in hand. 4. The Ld.CIT(A) has not considered that the AO has adopted income reasonably at 8% in view of the order of the Madras High Court in 326 ITR 551 (Mad.)cited surpa. 3. The facts of the issue are that the assessee is engaged in the business of Civil Engineering Contractor and in the assessment year under c…