TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 1759
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dispose of by this common order. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of Paints & Sanitary stores. He filed his return of income on 11.06.2010 declaring total income at Rs. 4,62,460/-. The case was selected for scrutiny for the following reasons as mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the body of the assessment order :- 1. "Assessee has filed return of income for the A. Y. 2010-11 manually instead of filing electronically, being auditable case u/s 44 B. Assessee is engaged in Paints & sanitary business. The assessee has declared net profit of Rs. 6,05,122/- against gross receipts/ sales of Rs. 9,50,01,256/- showing net profit of Rs. 0.636%. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ermined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 2,56,43,866/-. 4. Before CIT (A) the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the Ld. CIT(A) deleted an amount of Rs. 2,40,59,190/-and sustained addition of Rs. 15,84,676/- by observing as under :- "7. The appellant himself admits that his earlier Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account are bogus and the books of accounts were never produced before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings. Therefore, I am of the view that the appellant's books of accounts should be rejected under section 145 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and appellant's income from business should be estimated. Since the assessment order says that the appellant's sales was Rs. 3,16,93,527/-, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. The appellant crave leave to add, allow or amend any / all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 4. The assessee has also filed the cross objection by raising the following grounds of appeal :- 1. The appeal filed by the Department is misconceived, based on wrong facts which is also clear from the statements of Respondent and C. A. even the stock found does not support the grounds of the Appellant. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts as well as in law in not admitting fresh evidence and thereby sustaining addition of Rs. 15,84,676/- which is arbitrary, unjustified and without any basis. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts as well as in law in not allowing deduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee did not produce the requisite details before the Assessing Officer nor produced the books of accounts and the audit report u/s 44AB for which the Assessing Officer determined the total income at Rs. 2,56,43,870/-by making various additions. We find the Ld. CIT (A) granted substantial relief to the assessee by estimating the net profit @ 5% of the turnover and sustained addition of Rs. 15,84,676/-. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that due to wrong representation of the then counsel for the assessee, the case was not properly handled and therefore, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate with evidence to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding various items of the profit an....