Dynamic Engineers Infratec Pvt. Ltd., Kota V. DCIT Circle-2, Kota, Circle-2 Kota

ITA 859/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9120 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C GUPTA JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; TDS
• Section: 44AD; 40A(3); 37(1); 145(3); 144

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH VC A, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; ,O A JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NOS. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 13-14. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., E-20, INDUSTRIAL AREA, OPPOSITE TO MULTIMETALS, KOTA. CUKE VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AACCD 8566 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DINESH KUMAR (ADVOCATE) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI K.C. GUPTA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 31.07.2020. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04/08/2020. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BENCH : THESE THREE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THREE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (A) DATED 6.3.2019, 26.03.2019 AND 22.03 .2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11, 12-13 AND 13-14 RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSE E HAS RAISED COMMON GROUNDS IN THESE THREE APPEALS EXCEPT THE QUANTUM OF ADDITION AND RATE OF NET PROFIT APPLIED BY THE AO. THE GROUNDS RAISED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 2 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) KOTA ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1280 062/- BY ESTIMATING NP RATE OF 6.50% INSTEAD OF NP RATE OF 5. 19% SHOWN IN THE AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF HIS ORDER DATED 06 .03.2019 ARBITRARILY. (GROUND NUMBER 1 OF GROUND OF APPEAL F ILED BEFORE CIT (A). 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD, DELETE, ALTER AND AMEND OR MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL EITHER BEFORE O R AT THE TIME OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED AN ADDITIONAL GROUND F OR THESE THREE YEARS WHICH IS ALSO COMMON AND READS AS UNDER :- THAT AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION OF R S. 12,80,062/- BY INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE INC OME TAX ACT, 1961, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE TRUE AND CORRECT AND TRUE PROFIT CAN BE DEDUCED THE RE FROM. LEARNED LD. CIT APPEAL ALSO GROSSLY ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE ORDE R AO. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONCLUDED THROUGH VID EO CONFERENCE DUE TO THE PREVAILING SITUATION OF COVID 19 PANDEMIC. FIRST, WE TAKE UP THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UNDER SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. A/R AS WELL AS THE LD. D/R AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE AO HAS POINTED OUT VARIOUS DEFECTS DURING THE COURSE OF 3 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT WHICH ARE ENUMERATED IN PARA 3 AT PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER :- DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RAILWAY CONTRACT. CONTRACT WITH RAILWAYS INVOLVES F OOT OVER BRIDGE (FOB), LAYING OF NEW RAILWAY IN RAILWAY DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE FOLLOWING DE FECTS HAVE BEEN FOUND IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. I) WHEN RECONCILING THE TDS RECEIPTS, A TDS OF RS. 39, 535/- (GROSS RECEIPTS 17,44,660) HAS NOT BEEN RELATED TO THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT WAS RELATED TO PREVIOUS YEAR, I.E . ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. II) ON PERUSAL OF DIRECT EXPENSES, IT IS FOUND THAT THE FOLLOWING DISCREPANCIES WERE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE A SSESSEE FIRM- A) SOME PURCHASE BILLS ARE NOT AVAILABLE AND SOME PAYM ENTS WERE PAID IN CASH. B) CONSUMABLE GOODS, SITE EXPENSES ARE SUPPORTED BY SE LF MADE VOUCHERS. C) EXPENSES SUCH AS MESS, STACKING AND CUTTING ARE SUP PORTED BY SELF MADE VOUCHERS WHICH ARE NOT VERIFIABLE IN NATU RE. D) TRANSPORTATION AND CRANE EXPENSES ARE PARTLY SUPPOR TED BY THIRD PARTY VOUCHERS. E) SITE-WISE CONSUMPTION REGISTER NOT MAINTAINED. F) LABOUR CHARGES- MAINTAINED ONLY MUSTER ROLLS SHEETS WHICH ARE NOT VERIFIABLE NATURE. 4 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, BOOKS OF ASSESSEE CANNOT BE A CCEPTED AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE LIABLE TO REJECT. THEREFORE, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 08.03.2013 HAS BEEN ASKED T O SHOW CAUSE WHY BOOKS MAY NOT BE REJECTED U/S 145(3). THE ASSESSEE THOUGH EXPLAINED THE DEFECTS AS POINTE D OUT BY THE AO BUT TOOK THE STAND THAT DUE TO THE REASON OF WORKS EXECUTED AT VARIOUS SITES, IT IS NOT PRACTICALLY POSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE DETAILS OF CONSUMABLE GOODS OF EACH SI TE AND, THEREFORE, THE SITE-WISE CONSUMPTION REGISTER IS NOT MAINTAINED. THE LD. A/R HAS FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SISTER CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, DYNAMIC ENGINEERS VS. ACIT IN ITA NO. 856, 857 & 858/JP/2019 VIDE ORDER DATED 31 ST DECEMBER, 2019 HAS CONSIDERED AN IDENTICAL ISSUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2010-11 TO 12-13 AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. AT THE OUTSET, WE NOTE THAT THIS TRIBUNA L HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND REGARDING REJ ECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UNDER SECTION 145(3) IN PARA 5 OF THE ORDER DATED 31.12.2 019 IN CASE OF M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS VS. ACIT (SUPRA) AS UNDER :- 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE RAILWAY CONTRACT WORK AND FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.09.2010 DECLAR ING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,75,49,603/-. DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS WELL AS OTHER DETAILS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCES. FROM PERUSAL OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHER 5 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO NOTICED VARIO US DEFECTS WHICH ARE ENLISTED IN PARA 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER :- I) WHEN RECONCILING THE TDS RECEIPTS, A TDS OF RS . 39,535 (GROSS RECEIPTS 17,44,660) HAS NOT BEEN RELATED TO THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT WAS RELATED TO PREVIOUS YEAR, I.E . AY 2009-10. II) ON PERUSAL OF DIRECT EXPENSES, IT IS FOUND THAT THE FOLLOWING DISCREPANCIES WERE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE A SSESSEE FIRM- A) SOME PURCHASE BILLS ARE NOT AVAILABLE AND SOME PAYM ENTS WERE PAID IN CASH. B) CONSUMABLE GOODS, PURCHASES OF SAND WERE MADE IN SE LF MADE VOUCHERS. C) LABOUR CHARGES : ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED MUSTER ROLL WHERE ONLY NAME OF PERSON IS APPEARING AND DUE TO FULL PARTICU LARS OF LABOURS, PROPER VERIFICATION IS NOT POSSIBLE. D) EXPENSES ON MESS, RAIL LOADING, STACKING AND CUTTIN G ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY SELF MADE VOUCHERS WHICH IS NOT VERIFI ABLE IN NATURE. E) TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES; SOME EXPENSES WERE PARTLY SUPPORTED BY THIRD PARTY VOUCHERS. F) SITE-WISE CONSUMPTION REGISTER DID NOT MAINTAIN. THE AO ACCORDINGLY ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 08.03.2013 TO THE ASSESSEE ASKING AS TO WHY THE BOOKS SHOULD NOT BE R EJECTED UNDER SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS REPLY ON 11.03.2013 AND CONTENDED THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES/PURCHASES A RE SUPPORTED ONLY BY SELF MADE VOUCHERS DUE TO THE REASON THAT THESE ARE PETTY CASH PURCHASES WITHIN THE LIMIT UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT TAKE SHELTER UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM OF PURCHASES AND OTHE R EXPENSES WITHOUT 6 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. PROPER VOUCHERS. PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) ARE I NVOKED IRRESPECTIVE OF AN EXPENDITURE OTHERWISE NOT DISALLOWED UNDER SECTI ON 37(1) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED WHEN THE AO HAS SPECIFICALLY RAISED THE QUERY ABOUT THE SUPP ORTING EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF VARIOUS CLAIMS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SECOND EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE VARIOUS EXPENDITURES WE RE INCURRED AT THE REMOTE SITES OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE PR OPER VOUCHERS WERE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE BUT ONLY SELF MADE VOUC HERS WERE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS. IT IS PERTI NENT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS WORKING AS A RAILWAY CONTRACTOR AND, TH EREFORE, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR INCURRING EXPENDITURE IN THE PROCE SS OF EXECUTING THE CONTRACT WORK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUPPORTED BY PROPER VOUCHERS. IT IS NOT A RARE INCIDENT OF SMALL CLAIM OR ONLY FEW EXPENDITUR ES BUT THE AO HAS POINTED OUT SO MANY INSTANCES OF THE CLAIM OF EXPEN SES RIGHT FROM VARIOUS PURCHASES, CONSUMABLE ITEMS, MESS, RAIL LOADING, UN LOADING, CUTTING EXPENSES, TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES. THEREFORE, WHEN THERE IS GROSS FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE SUPPORTI NG EVIDENCE AND IT IS NOT AN ISOLATED INSTANCE BUT IT APPEARS TO BE THE C LAIM ON WHOLESALE BASIS WITHOUT SUPPORTING WITH PROPER VOUCHERS, THEN THE E XPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EXECUTING THE WORK AT REMOTE SITES CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. AS REGARDS THE SITE-WISE CONSU MPTION REGISTER, THE AO HAS EXPRESSED HIS INABILITY TO VERIFY THE CORREC TNESS OF THE CLOSING STOCK INCLUDING WORK-IN-PROGRESS DUE TO NON-AVAILABILITY OF SITE-WISE CONSUMPTION REGISTER. EVEN THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DIS PUTING THIS FACT THAT IT IS NOT MAINTAINING THE SITE-WISE CONSUMPTION REGIST ER AND THE CLOSING STOCK INCLUDING THE WORK-IN-PROGRESS IS DETERMINED ONLY O N PHYSICAL VERIFICATION. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PROPER RECORD OF T HE CONSUMPTION OF MATERIAL, THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CLOSING STOCK OF T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE VERIFIED BY THE AO. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE AO HAS RAISED A SPECIFIC 7 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. OBJECTION REGARDING TDS RECEIPTS NOT RELATING TO TH E YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION BUT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09-10 AND WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY EXPLANATION ON THIS OBJE CTION, THEN HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A S DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDERS O F THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BY INVOKING THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUN AL IN CASE OF ASSESSEES SISTER CONCERN ENGAGED IN THE SIMILAR BUSINESS ACTIVITY, THE ADDIT IONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. GROUND NO. 1 IS REGARDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WHILE ESTIMATING THE INCOME BY APPLYING N.P. RATE OF 6.5% INSTEAD OF N.P RATE DECLARED BY THE ASSESSED AT 5.18%. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. A/R AS WELL AS THE LD. D/R AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE HA S SUBMITTED THAT AFTER REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT THE AO HAS APPLIED THE N.P. RATE O F 6.50% WITHOUT ANY PROPER AND REASONABLE BASIS. THE AO HAS EVEN NOT CONSIDERED AN Y COMPARABLE CASE OR PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE N.P. RAT E DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS HIGHER THAN THE PRECEDI NG YEAR. THEREFORE, NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR ON THIS ACCOUNT. HE HAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ASSESSEES SISTER CONCERN VIDE ORDER DATED 31 ST DECEMBER, 2019 HAS CONSIDERED THIS 8 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. ISSUE AND DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HA S RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS VS. ACI T (SUPRA). 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED THA T THE AO HAS APPLIED 6.50% NP RATE FOR ESTIMATING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHIL E FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 READ WITH SECTION 145(3) OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, THE SAID RATE IS VERY REASONABLE AND PROPER IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF PRESUMPTIVE TAX UNDER SECTION 44AD OF THE IT ACT WHICH PROVIDES THE RATE OF PROFIT AT 8%. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CARE FUL PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, AT THE OUTSET WE NOTE THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN CON SIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, M/S. DYN AMIC ENGINEERS VS. ACIT (SUPRA) VIDE ORDER DATED 31 ST DECEMBER, 2019 IN PARA 8 AS UNDER :- 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT AFTER REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT UNDER SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT, THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO BE ESTIMATED ON SOME REASONABLE AND PRO PER BASIS. THE PAST HISTORY OF GP DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A PROPER GUIDANCE FOR ESTIMATION OF INCOME IN PURSUANT TO THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN THE CASE IN HAND, THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED GP AT 11.06%. THE A SSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE COMPARATIVE DETAILS OF GP DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS INCLUDING CURRENT YEAR AS UNDER :- 9 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. PARTICULARS FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10 SALES 9,86,19,448 8,59,02,816 8,08,18,835 GROSS PROFIT 1,18,33,739 92,70,173 89,37,103 NET PROFIT BEFORE INTEREST AND REMUNERATION TO PARTNERS. 55,15,568 51,64,667 41,17,011 GP RATIO 11.99% 10.79% 11.06% FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 THE ASSESSEE DECLAR ED GP AT 11.99%, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 09-10 THE ASSESSEE DECLARED GP AT 10.79%. HOWEVER, THERE WAS AN ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AND A FTER THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT (A), THE GP FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2009-10 COMES TO 11.02%. THEREFORE, EVEN IF TAKING THE AVER AGE OF PRECEDING TWO YEARS WHICH COMES TO 11.05%, THE GP DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AT 11.06% CANNOT BE SAID TO BE AT THE LOWER SIDE OR AN Y SIGNIFICANT DECLINE IN GP. ACCORDINGLY IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED THE GP IN LINE WITH THE PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS ATTAINED THE FINALITY, THE ADOPTION OF GP RATE BY THE AO WITHOUT ANY BASIS CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. HENCE THE TRADING ADD ITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED. IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE AO WHILE ESTIMATIN G THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 6.50% FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2010-11, 8.50% FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2012-13 AND 13-14. THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY EFFORTS TO FIND OUT THE COMPARABLE RATE OF NP IN IDENTICAL BUSINESS OR OTHE RWISE PREVAILING RATE IN THIS BUSINESS AS CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. EVEN THE AO HAS NO T CONSIDERED THE ASSESSEES OWN NET PROFIT DECLARED IN THE PRECEDING YEAR WHICH WAS NOT DISPUTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, ACCORDINGLY THE ADOPTION OF NP RATE @ 6.5% AND 8.5% RESPECTIVELY WITHOUT ANY BASIS OR 10 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. COMPARATIVE INSTANCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED. HENCE, FOLL OWING THE EARLIER ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA), THE TRADING ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED. 6. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, THE ASSESSEE HA S RAISED ONE MORE GROUND NO. 2 AS UNDER :- 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) KOTA ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO BY MAKING SEPARATE ADDITIONS OF RS . 60000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES RECEIVED, RS. 16,725/- O N ACCOUNT OF CONSULTANCY CHARGES RECEIVED AND RS. 9123/- ON ACCO UNT OF SUNDRY BALANCE WRITTEN OFF (TOTAL RS. 85848/-) VIDE HIS OR DER DATED 26.03.2019 (GROUND NUMBER 2 OF GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE CIT (A). 7. THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 85,848/- UND ER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE AO NOTED THAT APART FROM THE BUS INESS INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED OTHER INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRA TIVE EXPENSES, SUNDRY BALANCES WRITTEN OFF AND CONSULTANCY CHARGES. THE AO AFTER E STIMATION OF THE INCOME BY APPLYING N.P RATE HAS ALSO MADE A SEPARATE ADDITION OF THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 85,848/-. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. A/R AS WELL AS THE LD. D/R AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. SINCE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF TRADING INCOME BASED ON NET PROFIT RATE APPLIED BY THE AO HAS BEEN DELETED AND THE INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED WHILE DECIDING THE GROU ND NO. 1, THEN NO SEPARATE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF THIS INCOME WHICH ARE ALREADY PART OF THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND 11 ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019. M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRACK PVT. LTD., KOTA. CONSIDERED IN THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME IS CALLED FOR. HENCE THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT IS DEL ETED. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTL Y ALLOWED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/08/ 2020. SD/- SD/- ( FOE FLAG ;KNO ) ( FOT; IKY JKWO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 04/08/2020. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- M/S. DYNAMIC ENGINEERS INFRATRAC K PVT. LTD., KOTA. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 871, 859 & 860/JP/2019) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR