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 :

        2015 (11) TMI 1811 - 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

        Tribunal directs income re-estimation based on fair GP ratio The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal, directing the CIT(A) to re-estimate income based on a fair GP ratio from financial data of entities ...
                      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.

                          Tribunal directs income re-estimation based on fair GP ratio

                          The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal, directing the CIT(A) to re-estimate income based on a fair GP ratio from financial data of entities in the iron and steel industry. The assessee must cooperate. The Tribunal stressed the need for a fair estimate in line with the Supreme Court's ruling in the Kachwala Gems case.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 30,09,819/- due to discrepancy in purchases.
                          2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 3,06,54,370/- for purchases from Harsh Enterprises and Precision Containers.
                          3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 26,26,083/- for purchases from Shreeji Enterprises and International Steel Industries.
                          4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 23,00,805/- for purchases from Panam Sales Pvt. Ltd.
                          5. Request to restore the Assessing Officer's order.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 30,09,819/- Due to Discrepancy in Purchases
                          The Revenue argued that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,09,819/- made due to the difference in purchase amounts as per the Profit & Loss Account and the purchase register. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed a discrepancy of Rs. 30,09,816/- between the purchases debited in the P&L account and the details submitted by the assessee. The CIT(A) restricted the addition to a Gross Profit (GP) rate of 20% on the turnover, which was challenged by the Revenue.

                          2. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 3,06,54,370/- for Purchases from Harsh Enterprises and Precision Containers
                          The AO made an addition of Rs. 3,06,54,370/- under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, treating the purchases from Harsh Enterprises and Precision Containers as bogus since these parties denied any transactions with the assessee. The CIT(A) remanded the matter to the AO for a remand report, which confirmed that the assessee could not provide evidence to prove the purchases. The CIT(A) still restricted the addition based on an estimated GP rate.

                          3. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 26,26,083/- for Purchases from Shreeji Enterprises and International Steel Industries
                          The AO added Rs. 26,26,083/- treating the purchases from Shreeji Enterprises and International Steel Industries as hawala purchases due to the assessee's failure to produce these parties with their books of account. The CIT(A) again restricted the addition to a GP rate of 20% on the turnover.

                          4. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 23,00,805/- for Purchases from Panam Sales Pvt. Ltd.
                          An addition of Rs. 23,00,805/- was made by the AO on a protective basis for purchases from Panam Sales Pvt. Ltd. due to unverified details. The CIT(A) restricted this addition based on the estimated GP rate.

                          5. Request to Restore the Assessing Officer's Order
                          The Revenue sought to restore the AO's order, arguing that the CIT(A) erred in restricting the additions to a GP rate of 20% without a proper basis. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) did not disclose the basis for arriving at the 20% GP rate and directed the CIT(A) to re-estimate the income based on financial data from other entities in the iron and steel industry.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes. It directed the CIT(A) to re-estimate the income based on a fair and honest GP ratio derived from financial data of other entities in the iron and steel industry. The assessee was also directed to cooperate and provide relevant material for this estimation. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fair and honest estimate, in line with the Supreme Court's mandate in the Kachwala Gems case.
                          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