ATAUL MUSTAFA,NANBAI SHAHZADPUR KAUSHAMBI vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2 ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 84/ALLD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad27 Dec 2024AY 2013-14
Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2013-14 Ataul Mustafa, Vs. Dcit, Nanbai, Shahzadpur, Kaushambi Circle-2, Allahabad Pan:Bvcpm0589G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.12.2024 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Allahabad Dated 7.03.2019 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Has Ignored The Submissions Made Before Him, Ignored The Comparative Cases & Confirmed The Addition Of Rs. 25,96,375/- Which Was Made In An Ex Parte Order By Applying A Higher Rate (2%) Of Net Profit. 2- Because The Commissioner Of Appeals Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By Using The 2% Net Profit Rate Made Upon By The Ld Assessing Officer Relying Upon The Case Of Babu Islaam, The Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals Disregarded The Established Determination Of 0.41% Net Profit Made By The Hon' Able Settlement Commission In The Very Case Of Babu Islam. The Appellant Argues That The Rs 25,96,375/- Of Addition Should Be Deleted. 3- Because The Order Is Bad In The Eyes Of Law & Against The Facts.”
For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 250
disallowances, if they were not supported by vouchers or other evidences to the satisfaction of the assessee. For this proposition, he relied upon the case of Goodyear India Limited vs. CIT (2000)
246 ITR 116 (Del). Therefore, he applied the provisions of section 145(3) and rejected the books of the assessee. In estimating the income, he relied upon
