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>High Court Upholds Tribunal's Decision on Net Profit Ratio Estimation in Tax Assessment Appeal</h1> <h3>Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-31 Mumbai Versus Chandan Jangid Prop. Welldone Concept</h3> The High Court dismissed the Appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for a detailed examination and proper justification for the ... Bogus purchases - NP determination - HELD THAT:- Tribunal found that the AO, while estimating the net profit at 20% had proceeded on the basis of stock register, delivery challans of goods, work orders, and there was no application of mind for deriving at the figure of 20%. The Tribunal, therefore, found it fit to remand the proceeding to the Assessing Officer. We have not been shown as to how the finding regarding non application of mind by the Assessing Officer is incorrect. The Tribunal has rightly emphasised on the need to scrutinise the relevant aspects while working out the estimation, and not to arrive at the same in a haphazard manner. Tribunal, while disposing of the appeal has not given conclusive findings but has made certain observations to emphasis the need for remand. Tribunal has made these observations only to emphasis that there are various aspects for the Assessing Officer could have taken into consideration. No substantial question of law. Issues:Challenge to order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2010-11 regarding net profit ratio estimation and addition of income based on bogus purchases.Analysis:1. Estimation of Net Profit Ratio: The Appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for reexamination of the correct net profit ratio. The Appellant argued that the past history of the assessee should not be relevant in cases of bogus purchases. However, the Tribunal emphasized the need for a proper justification for applying a higher net profit rate of 20% when the assessee's historical net profit ratios ranged between 9.30% to 11.40%. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not provide sufficient reasoning for the 20% estimation and remanded the matter for a more detailed examination.2. Assessment Process: The Respondent, engaged in Interior Designing & Contracting, declared a net profit ratio of 11.48% for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer, after inquiry, rejected the assessee's book results and estimated the net profit ratio at 20%, adding further income of Rs. 86,64,618. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal both reviewed the case, with the Tribunal highlighting the lack of proper justification for the 20% estimation and the need for a more thorough examination of relevant aspects before arriving at such figures.3. Role of Tribunal: The Tribunal, in its decision, emphasized the importance of scrutinizing relevant aspects and not making estimations in a haphazard manner. While the Tribunal did not provide conclusive findings, it underscored the need for a detailed reassessment by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal's focus on the necessity of a thorough examination before estimation is crucial in ensuring fair and accurate assessments in income tax cases.4. Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the Appeal, stating that the questions of law framed did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a more detailed examination and proper justification for the net profit ratio estimation. The judgment underscores the importance of a reasoned and well-supported approach in income tax assessments to ensure fairness and accuracy in determining taxable income.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found