TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT rules in favor of assessee, upholds declared profit rate, criticizes rejection based on hypothetical grounds.</h1> <h3>Jai Parkash Versus Income-tax Officer</h3> Jai Parkash Versus Income-tax Officer - TMI Issues:1. Imposition of section 145(3) and rejection of books of accounts2. Application of gross profit rate by CIT(A) against the rate shown by the assesseeIssue 1: Imposition of section 145(3) and rejection of books of accounts:The assessee, involved in timber trading, faced rejection of books of account by the assessing officer due to alleged inconsistencies in the stock register. The assessing officer estimated the gross profit at 4.9% despite the assessee declaring 3.41%. In the first appeal, the assessee argued that apart from stock register issues, no other deficiencies were found in the books. The assessing officer's calculation of the gross profit rate was disputed by the assessee, who highlighted the impact of financial charges on the profit margin. The CIT(A) partially upheld the assessing officer's decision, considering the financial charges already factored into the trading account. The CIT(A) deemed a 4% gross profit rate reasonable, directing the AO to adjust accordingly.Issue 2: Application of gross profit rate by CIT(A) against the rate shown by the assessee:The assessee, dissatisfied with the CIT(A)'s decision, appealed to the ITAT, citing a judgment where a comparable case in the same line of business was considered. The ITAT compared the gross profit rates of various years and cases, ultimately concluding that the assessee's declared rate of 3.63% was justifiable. The ITAT emphasized the importance of considering the assessee's own previous record and rejected the CIT(A)'s application of a 4% gross profit rate. The ITAT noted that variations in profit margins from year to year are normal and that rejecting books based on hypothetical expectations of maintaining stock details is unwarranted. Consequently, the ITAT upheld the gross profit rate declared by the assessee, allowing the appeal.In conclusion, the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the relevance of the assessee's historical performance and rejecting the imposition of a higher gross profit rate. The judgment highlighted the normal fluctuations in profit margins and the unwarranted rejection of books based on hypothetical grounds, ultimately upholding the gross profit rate declared by the assessee.
TaxTMI 