Bal Kishan Garg, Meerut V. CIT, Meerut

ITA 3398/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7566 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI JAIN
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3398/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 BAL KISHAN GARG, THROUGH LEGAL HEIR HIS WIFE SMT. SAROJ GARG, R/O K-177, BOMBAY BAZAR, MEERUT. PAN: AFOPG9731K VS. CIT, MEERUT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.S. ANAND, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAVI JAIN, CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 31.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.06.2016 ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT BY THE CIT, MEERUT ON 18. 3.2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. ITA NO.3398/DEL/2013 2 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE OF POWER TO UP ASBESTOS LTD. AND CIVIL CONTRACT WOR K FOR TURBINE INSTALLATION, BOILER INSTALLATION AND HUSK YARD AT LUCKNOW AND DADRI SITES OF UP ASBESTOS. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 2 9.9.2008 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.6,44,780/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLE TED U/S 143(3) BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.1 LAC ON THE GROUND THAT C ERTAIN EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT PROPERLY SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE. THE CIT, MEERUT, REVISED THIS ORDER PASSED U/S 263 ON 1 8.03.2013 BY HOLDING THAT: A) THE ASSESSEE BEING A CIVIL CONTRACTOR HAS SHOWN NEG LIGIBLE NET PROFIT IN THE YEAR AS COMPARED WITH THE NET PROFIT DECLARED IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08; AND B) THE LD.CIT HELD THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, NE T PROFIT RATE OF ENTIRE DECLARED RESULTS INCLUDING INTEREST BE TAKEN BY THE AO AT 4%. 2.1. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. 3. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THA T THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW FOR THE REASON THAT BOOKS O F ACCOUNT HAVE NOT ITA NO.3398/DEL/2013 3 BEEN REJECTED EITHER BY THE AO OR BY THE LD.CIT. I NCOME CANNOT BE ESTIMATED WITHOUT REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. T HE AO MADE AN AD HOC DISALLOWANCE OF CERTAIN EXPENSES WITHOUT REJECT ING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN FACT, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED . UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SQUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD .CIT U/S 263 OF THE ACT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06.06.201 6. SD/- SD/- [SUCHITRA KAMBLE] [J. SUDHAKAR REDDY] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 6 TH JUNE, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.