M/s Chambal Developers, Gwalior V. A.C.I.T., Circle-I, Gwalior

ITA 86/AGR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0718 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-06-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: V BAPNA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 86/AGRA/2013 ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 M/S. CHAMBAL DEVELOPERS, VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, LALITPUR COLONY, GWALIOR. GWALIOR. (PAN: AAEFC 2440M C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. BAPNA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 24.06.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 28.06.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 30.01.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 07-08, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,06,882/- BY APPLYING PROFIT RATE O F 5%. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A FIRM AND WAS ENGAGED IN THE CIVIL CONSTRUCTION WORK. TOTAL RECEIPTS ARE SHOWN AT RS.5,15,84,195/- AND NET PROFIT AT RS.21,72,327/- @ 4.21% AS AGAINST GROSS R ECEIPT OF RS.3,24,25,488/- AND NET PROFIT OF RS.9,26,674/- SHOWN IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE AO FOUND THAT CERTAIN PURCHASE VOUCHERS ARE DEFECTIVE HAVING NO SERIAL NUMBER AND NO ITA NO. 86/AGRA/2013 2 SIGNATURES, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE NOTED AT PAGES 2 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND COMMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE CALLED FOR. THE A O FINDING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE NOT PROPER, REJECTED THE BOOK RESULTS U/S. 145(3) OF THE IT ACT AND APPLIED THE PROFIT RATE OF 5% AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.4,06,882/-. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DID NOT FIND EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE SATISFACTORY AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THE ADDITION IS EXCESSIVE AND IS LIABLE TO BE MODIFIED. THE LD. COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT WRITTEN SUBMISSION WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) IN WHICH IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE TOTAL EXPENSES IS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER FOR WHICH ADDITION WAS MADE FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.1,69,383/-. THEREFO RE, THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.4,06,882/-. HE HA S REFERRED TO WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ALSO STA TED THAT IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, THE PERCENTAGE OF PROFIT WAS 2.90% AN D IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE PERCENTAGE OF PROFIT REMAINED 3.78%. THER EFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT IN PRECEDING AND SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE PROF IT WAS LOW AS COMPARED TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS THUS , DECLARED PROGRESSIVE AND ENHANCED PROFIT RATE OF 4.21% IN THE ASSESSMENT YEA R UNDER APPEAL. AS SUCH, IT IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE S UPPRESSED THE PROFIT. THE LD. ITA NO. 86/AGRA/2013 3 COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT T HAT TOTAL VOUCHERS MENTIONED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAVING NO SERIAL NUM BER AND SIGNATURE PERTAINED TO TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.1,69,383/- WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN D ISPUTED BY THE LD. DR AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT ACTED UPON THE SAME ADVERSE LY. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS.4,06,882/- IS EXCESSIVE AND UNREASONABLE. WE MAY ALSO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE REJECTION OF THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. WE, THEREFORE, MODIFY THE ORDERS OF THE AUT HORITIES BELOW AND RESTRICT THE ADDITION TO RS.1,69,383/- AS WAS ACTUALLY WORKED OU T BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.4,06,882/-. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY