2019 (5) TMI 1859

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. Shri Amol B. Kirtane, Addl. CIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri G. Baskar, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessee. 3. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee is an individual who is doing the business of Highway Contractor in Tamil Nadu. It was a submission that the assessee had filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year admitting a total income of Rs. 1,03,49,240/-. The same was taken up for scrutiny, various details were called for and the assessment came to be completed by estimating the income of the assessee at 8% of the total turnover of Rs. 34,47,69,889/- after rejecting the books of accounts. It was a submission that on appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) considered the returns for the earlier ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was liable to be reversed and that of the AO restored. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. 6. A perusal of the Assessment Order in the present case clearly shows that the return was filed on 30.09.2013. The first hearing in the case was conducted on 27.07.2015, subsequently multiple hearings have been conducted on various dates as has been recorded by the AO in Para Nos. 3-7 of his order. As there was absolute non-cooperation from the assessee in providing the details and as also the details produced were questionable as has been explained in Para No.7 of the Assessment Order, the books of accounts maintained by the assessee was rejected and estimation was adopted. Normally, the earlier AYs and subsequ....