1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appeal partially allowed, net profit rate adjusted, deductions permitted under Income Tax Act</h1> The appeal against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order for the assessment year 2008-09 was partly allowed. The rejection of books of account ... - Issues involved: Appeal against order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2008-09.Grounds of Appeal:1. Orders passed by lower authorities deemed illegal, arbitrary, and bad in law.2. Rejection of books of account and application of net profit rate of 12% on net contract receipts.3. Non-allowance of deduction of interest and salary paid to partners u/s 40(b) of the Act.Details of Judgment:1. The assessee, a road contractor, declared total income of Rs. 61,23,300 for the year. During scrutiny, incomplete information led to rejection of books of account u/s 145(3) due to lack of stock register and original vouchers. Net income was estimated at Rs. 92,14,731 applying a flat rate of 12%.2. The appeal challenged the rejection of books and application of 12% net profit rate. The Tribunal found the rejection justified due to incomplete records. However, considering the assessee's declared net profit rate of 8.94%, a 9% rate was applied instead of 12%. Deductions for interest and partner salaries were allowed u/s 40(b).3. The Tribunal referred to a similar case where a 12% rate was not deemed appropriate, leading to the decision to adjust the net profit rate to 9% for the assessee. The appeal was partly allowed, with deductions allowed for interest and partner salaries.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with the net profit rate adjusted to 9% and deductions for interest and partner salaries permitted.