TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 1439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....construction. (Relevant copy of order sheet is enclosed as annexure 'A'). In doing so he has failed to follow the following decisions:- (a) Sanshi Ram Wadhwa vs CIT (1982) 138 ITR 830(P&H). (b) Hira Singh and Co. vs CIT (1998) 230 ITR 791 (HP) 2. The CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in failing to appreciate that the net profit rate of 5.5 % applied by the A.O. in the present case cannot be considered to be excessive. The assessees is carrying on the business of civil construction and in similar cases the Hon'ble ITAT have been pleased to confirm net profit rate of 7.5 %. Reference is invited to the following cases :- (a) Rajesh Kumar Singh vs ITO, Ward 1 (3), Gorakhpm- 5 MTC 289 ITAT Allahabad. (b) Dy. CIT, Circle Bulanclshaiiar vs. Allied Construction 105 1TD 1(SB) ITAT Delhi. 3. The CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts of the case is not following the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Lucknow in the case of Sri Arvind Kumar Choudhary in ITA no. 172/LKW/10 have on similar facts net profit rate of 5.5% had been confirmed is the case of the assessee carrying on the business of civil construction. 4. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s raised discrepancies in the books of account, the assessee has came forward for an agreed addition on the assurance that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act should not be levied. Therefore, the assessee itself has not allowed the Assessing Officer to go ahead with the examination of the books of account of the assessee. Now the assessee cannot take a plea that the Assessing Officer has estimated the net profit rate without rejecting the books of account of the assessee. Once the assessee has agreed for a particular addition, the assessee is refrained from challenging the order of the Assessing Officer. The ld. D.R. has further invited our attention to the copy of the proceedings, in which a specific narration for agreed addition is there and these proceedings were signed by the counsel for the assessee, Shri. M. M. Warsi, Advocate. The ld. D.R. has further contended that if the assessee has not agreed for an addition and the Assessing Officer has recorded wrong statement in the proceedings, the assessee could have made representation to the higher authorities or could have lodged a complaint with the Police for obtaining surrender by force, but nothing was done. Even befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that notice under section 143(2)was issued on 13.11.2009 and in response thereto, Shri. M. M. Warsi, Advocate appeared on 20.11.2009 and hearing was adjourned for 24.11.2009. On 24.11.2009, Shri. M. M. Warsi appeared and filed written reply along with copy of partnership deed and produced the cash book and ledger. Further details were also sought, which were filed on 27.11.2009. Thereafter on 8.12.2009, Shri. M. M. Warsi appeared and he agreed for estimation of net profit rate at 5.5%. The proceedings recorded on 8.12.2009 are extracted hereunder for the sake of reference:- "8.12.2009. Mr. M. M. Warsi, Advocate appeared. The N.P. rate of 1.05% appears to be very low. On discussion, it has been agreed to apply 5.5%G.P. rate which comes to an addition of Rs.26,92,922/- - 2,55,150/- = 24,37,772/-. Since this is an agreed addition, penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not being initiated." 11. Thereafter, the assessment order was passed on 10.12.2009. From a careful perusal of the order sheet, it appears that the hearing was concluded within few days and the net profit rate declared by the assessee at 1.05% appears to be very low according to the Assessing Officer as well as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer should have called the responsible person of the assessee-company to record his statement in this regard, but he has not done so. Therefore, we are of the view that the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer hurriedly on the basis of the statement of the counsel for the assessee without making proper verification of the books of account. Therefore, we are of the view that the assessment should be framed de novo after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We accordingly set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the Assessing Officer to frame the assessment de novo after making necessary verification from the books of account instead of relying the statement of the counsel for the assessee. Needless to mention here that proper opportunity of hearing be afforded to the assessee. I.T.A. No. 131/LKW/2012: 13. In this appeal, the Revenue has assailed the order of the ld. CIT(A) on the following grounds:- 1. The CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in failing to appreciate that the assessee is engaged in the business of civil constructions and has disclosed a net profit rate of only 0.52%. The Hon&#....