2018 (4) TMI 1956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssed by learned Assessing officer u/s 144 was not according to law. Prayed that provision of Section 144 are not applicable, the assessment order be annulled and the income returned be accepted. 2. That the learned CIT (A) further erred in estimating Net Profit of 3% on gross receipt against 8% applied by learned Assessing Officer, rejecting the ground to accept the books result, thereby maintaining an addition of Rs. 57,43,976/-(65,25,456- 7,81,480) to the book result. Prayed to accept the book result. 3. That, without prejudice, the learned CIT (A) erred in dismissing the ground to allow depreciation amounting to Rs 37,02,663/-. Prayed that even, without prejudice, where Net Profit rate is appl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....44 of the Act. 9. Be that as it may, even if the assessment is framed as ex-party the Assessing Officer is bound to take into account all relevant materials and then framed the assessment to the best of his judgment. This means that the Assessing Officer is bound to consider the material available on his record. We find that the Assessing Officer has completely ignored the past financial results of the assessee. The past financial results of the assessee are as under:- G.N. CONSTRUCTION, AMBIKAPUR-A.Y. 2011-12 Comparative Trading Results Sl No. Particulars A.Y 2011-12 A.Y 2010-11 A.Y 2009-10 A.Y 2008-09 1 Date of Order 2 7.02.2014 29.06.2012 23.03.2011 29.12.2010 2 Order passes u/s 144(1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessing Officer at the time of the assessment proceedings. No doubt the assessee did not produce the relevant bills/vouchers nor any supporting evidence was produced at the time of assessment proceedings. But as mentioned else were the Assessing Officer should not have ignored the past history of the assessee in estimating the net profit @ 8%. Though the First Appellate Authority has reduced the net profit rate to 3% but at the same time he also ignored the past history of the assessee. In our considered opinion considering the nature of business of the assessee the profit rate as declared appears to be reasonable. No comparable cases have been brought on record by the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A) to justify the adoption of the profit ra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er s. 10(2)(vii) would be computed without making any deductions for depreciation for arriving at the WDV of the asset. 2. The Board consider that where it is proposed to estimate the profit and the prescribed particulars have been furnished by the assessee, the depreciation allowance should be separately worked out. In all such cases, the gross profit should be estimated and the deductions and allowances including the depreciation allowance should be separately deducted from the gross profit. If it is considered that the net profit should be estimated it should be estimated subject to the allowance for depreciation and the depreciation allowance should be deducted there from. 3. Even where best judgment assessment is made....