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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal directs net profit estimation at 5% on stock sales, deletes additions with proof, upholds lacking proof.</h1> <h3>M. Suresh Kumar, Rajam Versus ITO, Ward-1, Srikakulam</h3> The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to estimate net profit at 5% on total stock put for sale and delete additions for unsecured loans where ... N.P. estimation - Held that:- Estimation of net profit of 5% on total stock put to sale net of all deductions is reasonable. Addition towards unproved, unsecured loans u/s 68 - Held that:- In this case, the assessee has filed confirmation letters and also filed bank account copy of the creditors along with their income tax return. The creditors have enough source of income to explain the loans given to the assessee. Therefore, we are of the view that A.O. was incorrect in making additions u/s 68 of the Act. The CIT(A) without appreciating the facts simply confirmed additions made by the A.O. Hence, we direct the A.O. to delete additions made towards unsecured loans received from G. Narayana Swamy and K. Rama Rao. In so far as unsecured loans received from G. Veera Swamy, the assessee failed to prove the credit by filing necessary identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. Even before us, the assessee failed to file any details with regard to the unsecured loans accepted from G. Veera Swamy. Therefore, we are of the view that the A.O. has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans received from G. Veera Swamy, accordingly, additions made by the A.O. are upheld. Issues involved:1. Estimation of net profit from the business2. Addition towards unproved, unsecured loans under section 68 of the Income Tax ActEstimation of Net Profit from the Business:The appeal was against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam for the assessment year 2011-12. The assessing officer rejected books of accounts and estimated net profit at 20% on total stock put for sale. The CIT(A) scaled down the net profit estimation to 10%. The assessee contended that the net profit estimated was high and cited cases where a 5% estimation was directed. The ITAT, Visakhapatnam in various cases directed a 5% net profit estimation. The Tribunal found the net profit estimated by the assessing officer to be high and directed a 5% estimation on total stock put for sale net of all deductions, following the precedent set by the coordinate bench.Addition towards Unproved, Unsecured Loans under Section 68 of the Act:The assessing officer made additions towards unsecured loans as the assessee failed to prove the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the parties involved. The CIT(A) deleted additions for some loans but upheld for others. The Tribunal found that the assessee provided confirmation letters, bank statements, and income tax returns of creditors, proving the genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness. The Tribunal held that once the initial onus was discharged, the assessing officer was incorrect in making additions under section 68. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to delete additions made towards certain unsecured loans while upholding additions for loans where the assessee failed to prove creditworthiness.In conclusion, the Tribunal directed the assessing officer to estimate the net profit at 5% on total stock put for sale net of all deductions and delete additions made towards unsecured loans where the assessee proved genuineness and creditworthiness, while upholding additions for loans where such proof was lacking.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found