← All Phrases

“profit element”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C5,654 judgments

The decision most relied on for profit element is CIT v. President Industries (258 ITR 654), cited in 471 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on profit element

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd.
355 ITR 498 · 2013 · High Court
252
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or hawala purchases where the existence of transactions is not entirely denied, only the profit element embedded in such purchases, and not the entire purchase price, can be added to the assessee's income. The focus is on determining a reasonable profit percentage for such additions.

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar
263 ITR 610 · 2003 · High Court
212
citing judgments

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

CIT v. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja
302 ITR 63 · 2008 · High Court
147
citing judgments

When unaccounted receipts or suppressed sales are detected and books of account are rejected under Section 145(3), additions to income must be restricted to the profit element embedded in such transactions, not the entire transaction value. This profit element is to be estimated by considering the assessee's regular profit ratio as per books of account.

Vijay Trading Co. v. ITO
388 ITR 377 · 2016 · High Court
119
citing judgments

When purchases are found bogus, only the profit element embedded therein, and not the entire purchase value, can be added to the assessee's income.

NK Proteins Ltd. v. DCIT
292 CTR 354 · 2017 · Supreme Court
115
citing judgments

When purchases are unverifiable or alleged to be bogus, only the profit element embedded in such transactions is taxable, not the entire purchase amount; the onus lies on the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions.

Judgments citing profit element

Shri Bhuraram Virdaji Choudhary, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 184/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhshri Bhuraram Virdaji Ito-19(1)(2) Choudhary (Proprietor Of M/S. Matru Mandir, I.T. Office Gaurav Steel), Office No. 126/8, Vs. Tardeo Road, Grant Road Dr. M.G. Mahimtura Marg, 3Rd (W), Mumbai-400007. Kumbharwada, Mumbai-400004. Pan: Adwpc8702P Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Jitendra Singh (Ar) Respondent By : Shri S.K. Bepair (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 06.8.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2018 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai [Ld. Cit(A)] Dated 16.10.2017 For Assessment Year 2009-10. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Singh (AR)For Respondent: Shri S.K. Bepair (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69A

completed on 17.03.2015. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order made the addition of 12.5% on account of non-genuine purchases as profit element embedded in such tainted purchase. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the re-opening as well as the disallowance under section 69A on account ... assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer after considering the submission of the assessee and disallowed 12.5% of the purchases holding that only profit element embedded in such purchases is liable to disallowed. We have noted that Assessing Officer has not given any finding over the documentary evidence furnished

Madireddy Venkanna Babu, Kakinada vs. The ITO, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 450/VIZ/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.450/Viz/2016 (धििाारणिर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12) Madireddy Venkanna Babu Vs. The Ito Kakinada Ward-2 Kakinada [Pan : Acepm0489R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri K.C.Das, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2018 31.07.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri K.C.Das, DR
Section 133ASection 147

construction by the DVO are CPWD rates and the same are not comparable to the local rates. They are very exorbitant and it includes profit element of 5 Madireddy Venkanna Babu, Kakinada the contractors, therefore requested to allow the rate difference @ 15% in cost of construction. Further, the Ld.AR argued ... shows substantial difference in cost of construction. The DVO has valued the property on the basis of CPWD rates and CPWD rates include the profit element of the contractor. Therefore, the CPWD rates cannot be applied 6 Madireddy Venkanna Babu, Kakinada mutatis mutandis to the constructions made in the local