Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

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>ITAT Overturns CIT(A)'s 8% Income Estimation, Emphasizes Factual Accuracy</h1> <h3>Ashok Kumar Ghosh Versus ACIT, Circle-1 BWN</h3> The ITAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision to estimate income at 8% and emphasizing the incorrect assumptions made regarding the ... Enlarging scope of limited scrutiny - rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee and estimating the income - CIT- A directed re-compute the net profit of the assessee at 8% in place of 6.54% as returned by the assessee - HELD THAT:- We do not agree with the contention of the Ld. Sr. D.R. on this issue for the reasons that if there is deficiency in vouchers or bills supporting the inference of the expense, this in our view cannot make accounts maintained by the assessee to be incorrect or incomplete. At the most, the expenses to the extent they are not supported by the vouchers can be regarded to be non-genuine and can be disallowed by the AO while computing the income of the assessee, but it cannot give the power to the AO to hold that the accounts are not correct or incomplete i.e. for the said reason only the AO cannot resort to reject the books of accounts of the assessee. FAA [Ld. CIT(A)] has ventured to do so (rejection of books of account) by assuming incorrect facts and misdirected himself by stating that the assessee has not produced the books of accounts before the AO/himself, whereas the AO has categorically observed that the assessee has produced cash books, ledgers and other documents called for by him. And in this context, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of ₹ 1.48 crores by relying on the veracity of the cash book submitted by the assessee before him. As findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue shows non-application of mind and exposes per-se contradiction of facts. Therefore, the assumption drawn by the Ld. CIT(A) to re-compute the net profit of the assessee at 8% in place of 6.54% as returned by the assessee needs to be interfered with because it has no sanction of law and we set aside the same. Therefore the assessee succeeds. So, the direction of Ld. CIT(A) to re-compute the income of the assessee at 8% of the net profit of the gross receipt is canceled. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:Enlarging scope of limited scrutiny by rejecting books of accounts and estimating income.Analysis:The appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2015-16. The main grievance of the assessee was regarding the Ld. CIT(A) enlarging the scope of limited scrutiny and rejecting the books of accounts, leading to the estimation of income. The AO had initially raised four issues for limited scrutiny, and after examining the documents, made an adverse inference on one issue, resulting in an addition to the income. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition but proceeded to estimate the income by directing the AO to consider a net profit of 8% on gross receipts, contrary to the 6.54% declared by the assessee. The appeal was made challenging these actions.During the hearing, the Ld. A.R. of the assessee pointed out contradictions in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the rejection of books of accounts. The Ld. CIT(A) had made observations suggesting dissatisfaction with the maintenance of accounts, despite the AO's acknowledgment of the documents provided by the assessee. The Ld. A.R. argued that the Ld. CIT(A) misdirected himself by assuming that the assessee did not produce necessary documents, leading to an incorrect estimation of income. The Ld. CIT(A) had ordered the re-computation of net profit at 8%, which was deemed unauthorized by the ITAT due to the lack of legal basis. The ITAT found the Ld. CIT(A)'s conclusions to be contradictory and lacking proper application of law, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee by canceling the direction to re-compute income at 8%.In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to estimate income at 8% and emphasizing the incorrect assumptions made by the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the rejection of books of accounts. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual accuracy and legal basis in making such determinations, ultimately leading to a favorable outcome for the assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found