Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

A.Y.         Turnover (in Net profit (in Rs.) Net          profit   rate Remarks
             Rs.)            depreciation          before depreciation,
                             interest and salary interest and salary to
                             to partners           partners (in %)
2012-13      8,49,55,630 40,52,383                 4.77%
2013-14      8,34,09,632 43,32,648                 5.19%
2014-15      16,45,77,114 89,16,561                5.42%                  Present A.Y.
Normally when the turnover increases the net profit decreases but it is not the case of the appellant. Further, the case of the appellant was scrutinized in earlier years also but there was no disallowance with regard to net profit.

10. Excess Profit and tax paid by the assessee: 10.1 It is pertinent to note that the appellant has declared better Net profit rate and excess income of profit in this year Rs. 89,16,561/- as against 43,32,648/- in last year which is more then to double. In the year under consideration the turnover as well as net profit has increased drastically and paid more tax than to last year but the ld. AO has ignored this vital facts and proceed on mere assumption and guess work and estimated the net profit without bring any material evidence and any comparable in support of him. Further if there was a decrease in the net profit rate, but at the same time the turnover is also increased about 1000% this case i.e. from 8.343 crore to 16.45 crore approx. And the assessee has declared much profit and paid more tax then to last year. As per normal prevailing practices in the market in order to increase the turn over the business man has to sacrifice about the rate of profit on turnover. In this particular case in the year under consideration the turnover is increased by 1000% , the net profit rate was also increased despite considering the nature of trade, cut throat completion in market and the ultimate business conducted by the assessee firm. The assessee is to state that there was no change in the nature of business in the year under consideration. But the Ld. AO as well as the ld. CIT(A) have not appreciated the position of income and the explanations furnished in this respect in their true perspectives. The Ld. AO has further erred in applying high flat rate of net profit before depreciation and interest. The Ld. AO has not brought on records any comparative case also. In this respect we I.T.A. No.197/Jodh/2023 also like to submit that if we compare the net profit on capital employed by the assessee firm it appears that the assessee firm had earned Considering the issue of rate of return from all aspects it appears that the assessee firm has earned profit at very reasonable rate and there was no necessity to disturbed the income determined and declared on the basis of books even though the books have been rejected. The above basic facts and vital issue that the profit declared by the assessee in the year under consideration was much more better in all respect and the net profit of the year under consideration was declared about 330% higher in comparison to profit of earlier year which is also go in favor of the assessee and regarding this we rely upon on the finding of the Honble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of M/s Hanuman Tubewel Company Vide para 7 of page 5 of order in ITA No. 265/Jp/2010 dt. 25.06.2010 for A.Y. 2007-08.