TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1696
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Order under Section 147 rws 144 rws 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) as well as the Order under Section 250 of the Act is bad in law and in facts and circumstances of the case; 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in carrying out and the NFAC/CIT(A) have erred in confirming an addition on account of business income amounting to INR 26,58,857; 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has erred in carrying out and the NFAC/CIT(A) have erred in confirming an addition on account of business income amounting to INR 26,58,857 by considering an ad-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was issued by the Ld. AO on the same date. In response thereto, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 4,93,664/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO observed that the total credits in the bank accounts of the assessee aggregated to Rs. 2,52,16,931/-. The Ld. AO called upon the assessee to explain the source of such deposits. However, not being satisfied with the explanation furnished, the Ld. AO estimated business profit at the rate of 12.5% the entire bank credits of Rs. 2,52,16,931/-. Accordingly, profit was computed at Rs. 31,51,123/-. Since the assessee had already declared business profit of Rs. 4,92,266/-, the balance amount of Rs. 26,58,857/- was added to the income of the assessee. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e bank credits, which is arbitrary and excessive. Accordingly, the Ld. AR prayed before the Bench to delete the addition made by the Ld. A.O. 6. In alternate submission, the Ld. AR further submitted that even if estimation is to be made, a reasonable rate should be adopted. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Y. Jaya Prakash in ITA No.1693/Hyd/2012 dated 10.05.2013, wherein under similar circumstances profit was estimated at 4% of turnover. Accordingly, it was prayed that income may be estimated at 4%. 7. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative ("Ld. DR") relied on the orders of the lower authorities. He invited our attention to the page no. 23 of the assessment order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, in absence of any supporting evidence, the claim of the assessee that he is merely a commission agent cannot be accepted. 9. Having said so, we find merit in the contention of the assessee that estimation of profit at 12.5% is excessive and not supported by any comparable instance. We have gone through the para no. 11 of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Y. Jaya Prakash (Supra), which is to the following effect: "11. We find that the assessee's nature of business is selling fruits and vegetables and buying from the farmers directly and transported in tractors in smaller units, pooled from various places and dispatched in bulk to various places. We confirm the Order of the CIT(A) in adopting the percent....