2015 (11) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Y/13-14, in IT Appeal No.353/CIT(A)-PDY/13-14, in IT Appeal No.352/CIT(A)- PDY/13-14, in IT Appeal No.351/CIT(A)-PDY/13-14 vide order dated 25.03.2015 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and with respect to penalty in IT Appeal No.442/CIT(A)-15/13-14, in IT Appeal No.443/CIT(A)-15/13-14, in IT Appeal No.444/CIT(A)-15/13- 14, in IT Appeal No.445/CIT(A)-15/13-14 vide order dated 25.03.2015 passed under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 for assessment years 2004-05 to 2008-09 respectively. Since the quantum appeals and the penalty appeals are all on identical facts and interlinked, they are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. Grounds of appeals. 2.1 QUANTUM APPEALS IN ITA Nos.146....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2008-09 26.03.2009 27,72,623 19,67,307 5,089/- Filed beyond the time limit specified U/s.139(4) of the Act. The return was lodged.   The Ld. Assessing Officer observed that the assessee firm had not furnished the audit report U/s.44AB of the Act for all the assessment years. Further, the assessee did not produce the books of accounts, sales invoice and other details required by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Ld. Assessing Officer invoking the provisions of section 44AF of the Act computed the income of the assessee at 5% of the turnover as follows:- Sl. No. A.Y Turnover (`) Income computed by A.O at 5%of turnover (`) 1 2004-05 29,09,999 1,45,500/- 2 2005-06 32,03,700 1,60,185 3 2006-07 30,73,077 1,53....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... However, we find that the Ld. Assessing Officer has not heeded to the request of the assessee to while invoking the provisions of Section.44AF of the Act with respect to its actual turnover. It appears that the Ld. Assessing Officer had computed 5% of the turnover declared in the return of income or admitted by the assessee whichever is higher. On this issue, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that, the Ld. Assessing Officer should have computed 5% of the turnover on the actual turnover admitted by the assessee irrespective of the amount declared in the return of income because the claim of the assessee appears to be genuine. Therefore, we hereby direct the Ld. Assessing Officer to compute 5%....