2022 (3) TMI 1375
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DR For the Respondent : Shri Biswaswar Ghosh, Advocate ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present four appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the separate orders dated 19.02.2019 & 27.02.2019 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as 'CIT'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. Since the facts and issues i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e-computing the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,26,704/- instead of Rs. 1,84,07,598/-, being the highest figures derived from the three methods i.e. (i) Net Inflow of Money Method (ii) Peak in cash or Bank book (iii) Accretion to assets in the Balance Sheet however the Ld. CIT(A) accepted that the assessee failed to prove any business activities carried out by the assessee. 4. On the facts and c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s as the factory of the assessee at that time was sealed. The Assessing Officer, therefore, in the absence of books of account and documents and required verification etc. re-computed the net profits of the assessee at Rs.1,84,07,598/- against nil income by disallowing the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80IC of the Act. 4. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee furnished necessary ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not get satisfied with the said report stating as under: "4.4DC. Hardly any follow-up work worth mentioning seems to have been done post assessment during pendency of appeal. Having regard to complexity of case and lukewarm or no progress at A.O's end, I decide the appeal on available materials". 6. Thereafter the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to decide the issues and he computed net profit of the asses....