Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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
  • 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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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 rules on income estimation for sub-contracts, approves depreciation allowance.</h1> <h3>SVC Projects Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam And Vice-Versa</h3> SVC Projects Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam And Vice-Versa - TMI Issues Involved:1. Validity of the assessment under section 153B.2. Legal validity of the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A vs. section 144 r.w.s. 153A.3. Opportunity of being heard before approval under section 153D.4. Requirement of the AO's seal on the assessment order and notice of demand.5. Additions to returned income without pending assessment or seized material.6. Estimation of income and principles of natural justice.7. Estimation of income percentage by CIT(A).8. Classification of interest on fixed deposits.9. Approval under section 153D and application of mind.10. Issuance of notice under section 143(2) for multiple assessment years.11. Estimation of profits on sub-contracts.12. Allowance of depreciation from estimated income.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Assessment Under Section 153B:The appellant did not press this ground during the hearing. Therefore, the tribunal dismissed it as not pressed.2. Legal Validity of the Assessment Under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A vs. Section 144 r.w.s. 153A:This ground was also not pressed by the appellant during the hearing and was dismissed accordingly.3. Opportunity of Being Heard Before Approval Under Section 153D:The appellant did not pursue this ground during the hearing, leading to its dismissal.4. Requirement of the AO's Seal on the Assessment Order and Notice of Demand:This issue was not pressed by the appellant during the hearing and was dismissed.5. Additions to Returned Income Without Pending Assessment or Seized Material:The appellant did not press this ground, and it was dismissed.6. Estimation of Income and Principles of Natural Justice:The appellant argued that the income was estimated at a fixed percentage without an opportunity to rebut, violating principles of natural justice. However, this ground was dismissed as it was not pressed during the hearing.7. Estimation of Income Percentage by CIT(A):The CIT(A) estimated the income at 12.5% of gross receipts, which the appellant contended was arbitrary and unreasonable. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s estimation, noting that the appellant's profit history ranged from 8% to 12.29%, and the estimation at 12.5% was reasonable given the evidence of suppression of income and inflation of expenditure found during the search.8. Classification of Interest on Fixed Deposits:This ground was not pressed by the appellant and was dismissed.9. Approval Under Section 153D and Application of Mind:The appellant did not press this ground, and it was dismissed.10. Issuance of Notice Under Section 143(2) for Multiple Assessment Years:The appellant did not pursue this ground during the hearing, leading to its dismissal.11. Estimation of Profits on Sub-Contracts:The appellant argued that the estimation of income at 12.5% on sub-contracts was unreasonable, contending that profits should be shared between the assessee and sub-contractors. The tribunal directed the AO to estimate income at 8% on sub-contracts and 12.5% on own contracts, excluding sub-contract payments deemed bogus.12. Allowance of Depreciation from Estimated Income:The revenue appealed against the allowance of depreciation from the estimated income. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow depreciation, citing the statutory nature of depreciation and relevant case law, including the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Y. Ramachandra Reddy and the Supreme Court's decision in Awasthi Traders.Conclusion:The tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeals concerning the estimation of income on sub-contracts and dismissed the revenue's appeals regarding the allowance of depreciation. The final order was pronounced on May 23, 2018.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found