Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2016 (8) TMI 1216 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Appeal allowed: Assessment not justified, addition unsustainable. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on both counts: the reopening of the assessment under Section 148 was not justified, and the addition ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Appeal allowed: Assessment not justified, addition unsustainable.

                            The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on both counts: the reopening of the assessment under Section 148 was not justified, and the addition based on the low gross profit rate was not sustainable. The order was pronounced in the open court on 10/08/2016.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Reopening of assessment under Section 148.
                            2. Addition based on low Gross Profit rate.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 148:

                            The appellant challenged the reopening of the assessment under Section 148, arguing that the reasons recorded for issuing the notice were not valid. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued the notice based on the belief that Rs. 22,44,790 had escaped assessment due to the assessee not disclosing income fully and truly. The AO's reasoning was that the assessee's income for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 should have been Rs. 1,50,74,040, including the surrendered amount of Rs. 1.10 crore during a survey, but the return filed was for Rs. 1,28,29,250, suggesting an understatement of income.

                            The Tribunal found several flaws in the AO's reasoning:
                            - The assessee had indeed included the surrendered amount in its return for AY 2011-12, and the returned income was higher than the surrendered amount.
                            - The AO incorrectly compared the returned income for AY 2010-11 plus the surrendered amount with the returned income for AY 2011-12.
                            - The AO's reliance on the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision in the case of M/s Kim Pharma Pvt. Ltd. was misplaced, as the facts of the present case were different.

                            The Tribunal concluded that the reasons recorded by the AO did not withstand judicial scrutiny and failed to meet the prima facie opinion test. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment was not justified.

                            2. Addition Based on Low Gross Profit Rate:

                            The AO had rejected the assessee's books of account and estimated the net profit at 3.34% of the turnover, resulting in an addition of Rs. 33,52,078. Additionally, the AO reclassified an income of Rs. 70,04,386 from "business income" to "income from other sources" and treated Rs. 1.10 crore as deemed income under Section 69C, leading to a total income computation of Rs. 2,20,02,720.

                            Upon appeal, the CIT(A) disagreed with the AO's estimation of net profit and instead focused on the gross profit rate. The CIT(A) noted a decline in the gross profit rate from 16.70% in AY 2010-11 to 12.37% in AY 2011-12 and made an addition of Rs. 43,45,658 based on the lower gross profit rate.

                            The Tribunal reviewed the financial results and found that the assessee's net profit ratio for AY 2011-12, excluding the surrendered income and exceptional items, was 3.9%, which was better than the previous year's ratio of 3.3%. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had incurred higher outside job work expenses and sales tax payments, which justified the lower gross profit rate.

                            The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's financial performance was better in AY 2011-12 compared to AY 2010-11, and the addition made by the CIT(A) was not sustainable. Therefore, the Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s finding and held that the addition of Rs. 43,45,658 was not justified.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on both counts:
                            - The reopening of the assessment under Section 148 was not justified.
                            - The addition based on the low gross profit rate was not sustainable.

                            Order:
                            The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 10/08/2016.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found