Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Partap Singh Rajender Chamola on 19 March, 2016

5. Further, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Tribunal, Kolkata bench dated 20/01/2016 in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Private Limited, wherein net profit estimated at the rate of 8%, was reduced to 2.5% after allowing statutory expenses like depreciation interest on borrowed capital, etc. He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal, Ahemedabad bench in the case of Quality Construction in ITA No. 4544/Ahd./2007 and others and submitted that in the said case the Tribunal confined the net profit at the rate of 3.25% of the receipt. The Ld. counsel also referred to decision dated 22/05/2015 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT- 21 Vs Rajender Singh, wherein the Hon'ble High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal confirming the net profit rate of 1.94% estimated by the Ld. CIT(A).
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

M/S. Kachwala Gems, Jaipur vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 14 December, 2006

"4.3.5 As the facts and circumstances of the case is almost similar, respectfully following the observation of CIT(A) in A.Y. 2012-13, the rejection of books of accounts of the appellant is upheld as the Assessing Officer has given justified reasons for the same. Further, the appellant could not produce any supporting evidence and approved rates and the reasons of fall in the approved rates during the course of appellate proceedings also. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Awadhesh Pratap Singh Abdul Rehman & Bros. v. CIT 210 ITR 406 Besides this, I am inclined to hold in this year also that the estimation of profit of works contract which is taken by the Assessing Officer @ 8% is excessive and should be calculated @ 5% reduced by the depreciation of Rs.20,09,838/- and the income from supply which is estimated by the Assessing Officer @ 3% deserves to be confirmed. However, no relief is required to be given to the appellant for the 'Work Contract Tax' shown by the appellant in the ledger account which is a part of total contract receipt and once the books of accounts is rejected, the estimation of profit is to be made on the gross contract receipt. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kachwala Gems v. CIT 288 ITR 10. In this light, the total income of the appellant is to be worked out as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 70 - M Katju - Full Document
1