cites: 84371003

State Of Kerala vs C. Velukutty on 2 December, 1965

3. As emphasized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Kerala v. C. Veiukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) that "though there is an element of guess- work in best judgment assessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case".

Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 170 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Assam Etc vs The Panbari Tea Co. Ltd on 19 April, 1965

In CIT v. Ranichhera Tea Co. Ltd. (1994) 207 ITR 979 (Cal), the ITO rejected the loss return and determined the loss at nil on default of the appellant to produce books of account. No basis for computation was disclosed by the ITO. It was held by the Calcutta High Court that the ITO acted illegally."

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 127 - Full Document

Jot Ram Sher Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, United ... on 11 January, 1934

2. A best judgment assessment is not by way of penalty of non-compliance as held in Jot Ram Sher Singh v. CIT (1934) 2 ITR 129 (All).

Allahabad High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 25 - Full Document

State Of Orissa vs Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo on 1 December, 1969

Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) that "the mere fact that the material placed by the assessee before the assessing authorities is unreliable does not empower those authorities to make an arbitrary order.

Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 84 - K S Hegde - Full Document

R. K. Vishal Rice & General Mills vs Income Tax Officer. Ito V. R. K. Vishal ... on 17 April, 1995

In Anand Rice & Oil Mills v. C!T (1977) 108 ITR 372 (Cal.), huge additions were made by the ITO on the ground that the assessee had inflated the purchase prices of goods and a major portion of the addition was sustained by the Tribunal without furnishing any basis of its own estimate. The Calcutta High Court held that the order of the Tribunal being arbitrary, the same could not be sustained.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar Cites 1 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Ganga Prasad Sharma vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. on 12 March, 1980

In Ganga Prasad Sharma v. CIT (1981) 132 ITR 87 (UP'), the Madhya Pradesh High Court emphasized that while making best judgment assessment, the basis of computation should be disclosed by the ITO.

Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Shreegopal Mundhra, Angul vs Ito, Angul Ward, Angul on 30 January, 2017

In the present case, it is observed that the reasonable basis is the past accepted results of the assessee. We also observe that the rate of net profit at 5.35%, 5.16% and 5.15% has been accepted by the department in the case of the assessee itself for the preceding assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-2010. In the assessment year under consideration, the assessee has shown net profit rate at 5.07%. Respectfully following the above quoted decisions and the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shreegopal Mundhra (supra) and considering the facts of the present case in its entirety, we are of the considered view that there is force in the arguments of ld A.R. of the assessee that net profit for the year under consideration should be estimated at 6% of the gross turnover. We modify the order accordingly. Thus, the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are partly allowed.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Cuttack Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results