TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 948
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3.2015 for assessment year 2012-013.The grounds raised by the assessee per its appeal are as under:- "1) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law as well as facts in sustaining addition of Rs. 2945490/- out of addition of Rs. 5610944/- made by Assessing Officer. 2) That the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law as well as facts in keeping profit percentage at 6% instead of 5.48% as disclosed by the appellant. 3) That in the facts and circumstances of the case looking to fall in turnover and improvement in profit percentage, 5.48% profit as declared by appellant should be accepted and addition sustained by CIT(Appeals) of Rs. 2945490/- should be deleted. 4) That appellant craves to ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e as shown in the last year. Further assessee submitted that in the last two A.Y. i.e. 2010-11 & 2011-12, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) and addition of Rs. 33,46,155/- and Rs. 32,40,028/- were made by the AO after rejecting the books of account considering the profit @ 5.13% and 5.77% respectively. However, the AO had made estimation of profit @ 6.5% without considering the comparable cases which are engaged in the same line of business. However the ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and material available on record partly allowed relief to the assessee by observing as under:- "5. I have carefully considered the action of the Ld. AO In rejecting the book of the appellant-assessee on account of the Inability....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... b. For the A.Y 2011-12, the scrutiny assessment had been completed on 30.03.2014. In that year, the Ld. AO after the rejection of the books had adopted the same percentage of 5.15% of the turnover to be the estimated profit, and had made an addition accordingly. As further additions / disallowances had also been made, in effect the assessee was assessed at 5.77% of the total turnover in this year, the assessee had disclosed a percentage of profit of 5.44% as per the book profits. In this year also the assessee has not preferred any appeal. c. From the aforesaid It is seen that the Ld AOs have adopted a benchmark of 5.15% approximately for the two immediately preceding years, and have completed the assessment, after makin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the factual matrix, as elaborated by the Ld. AO for those years compared with the subject assessment year under consideration. I find that the assessee has disclosed a fair rate of profit vis-a-vis the earlier years in which the additions had been made by the Ld.AO, more so in a situation where the turnover of the assessee-firm had gone down exponentially. The Ld. AO has also not made out any comparable cases, as had been done for the A.Y 2010-11, and followed for the A.Y 2011-12. That also, in my considered opinion in the matter may not be justified when the assessee's past history was a part of the records available with the Ld.AO. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bikaner VS M/s Ashok Behi Bharat Sethy &. Party, date of ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s filed paper book as well as written submissions consisting pages from 1 to 5 and financial data (copy filed) representing the profitability of the assessee in the last two Assessment years as detailed under : Coastal Infra Asstt. Year 2012-13 [figures in crores in rupees] Asst. Year Turnover Returned income Percentage Assessed percentage CIT(A) percentage 2010-12 115.12 5.57 4.84% 5.13% No appeal 2011-12 97.30 5.29 5.44% 5.77% No appeal 2012-13 57.11 3.13 5.48% 6.50% 6% (in appeal before ITAT) Submission before Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (i) Continuous fall in turnover from 115.12 crore to 57.11 crore almost half during the year ....