TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1910
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate commission income at 0.1% of the sales turnover which works to Rs.5,25,871/- (0.1% of Rs. 52,58,70,822/-} and thereby giving relief to the assessee of Rs. 99,91,545/- without appreciating the detailed facts narrated by the A.O in the assessment order. 2. "On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal relying on the assessment order passed by another A.O in the case of Smt. Kalawati Negi where under the similar facts that A.O estimated the commission income @ 0.1% Accordingly the same cannot be accepted as the estimation or decision taken by another A,O is not binding on the A.O in this case because that estimation by that A.O is not challenged before any appellat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vised return of income on 04.10.2013 declaring total income to the tune of Rs.2,01,970/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee was an individual and having salary income from M/s. Shirdi Industries Ltd., and also carrying out business activities in the name of M/s. Hiralal Printing and assessee also engaged in the trading activity of MDF Board & Plywood. On verification, it was found that the sale and purchase of the assessee was of the same amount i.e. to the tune of Rs.52,58,70,822/-. Thereafter, the notice was given and after the reply of the assessee, 2% amount of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... company to increase the turnover of the group company. It was further admitted that there was no movement of goods and the transactions were shown for doing circular trading within the group. The Ld. AO has estimated the income on account of commission @ 2% of the sales turnover shown by the appellant. The appellant submitted a copy of assessment order in the case of Smt. Kalawati Negi PAN: AFRPN4766Q where under the similar facts the AO estimated the commission income @0.1% of the sales turnover. It was stated that Smt. Kalawati Negi is also an employee of the same group and the she has also shown the similar transactions to jack up the turnover. The appellant has also filed copy of the appellate order passed by the undersigned in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he turnover. It is seen that the facts of the case of the appellant are identical to the facts of that case. In my opinion the estimation made by the Ld. AO is on higher side. I find force in the augment of the appellant that being an employee she has shown these transaction at the instance of employer and she has not shown the transactions to any third parties outside the group for earning any income. However, to meet the ends of justice. I restrict the estimation of income at 0.1% of the sales turnover which works out to Rs.3,12,764/- (0.1%). Therefore, I direct the AO to estimate commission income at 0.1% in the turn, which works out to Rs.3,12,764/- 0.1% of Rs.32,27,64,170/- and restrict the addition to Rs.3,12,764/-. The appellant get ....