https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183258 The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the estimation of income at 12.5% of gross contract receipts, offering the assessee the choice to follow a lower rate based on previous decisions. Depreciation on vehicles used in the contract business was allowed despite non-registration in the company's name. The Tribunal set aside the issue of treating the assessee as 'assessee in default' and recovery of TDS for further assessment. Regarding credit for TDS made on mobilization advance, the Tribunal directed re-examination by the CIT(A) to determine eligibility based on accounting and payment to subcontractors. en-us Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jun 2016 18:58:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183258 The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the estimation of income at 12.5% of gross contract receipts, offering the assessee the choice to follow a lower rate based on previous decisions. Depreciation on vehicles used in the contract business was allowed despite non-registration in the company's name. The Tribunal set aside the issue of treating the assessee as 'assessee in default' and recovery of TDS for further assessment. Regarding credit for TDS made on mobilization advance, the Tribunal directed re-examination by the CIT(A) to determine eligibility based on accounting and payment to subcontractors. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183258