|
The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 1306 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 68
Tribunal had decided the exactly similar issue in the case of M/s. Becon Constructions (P) Ltd. v. ACIT in ITA No. 5034/Del/22016 (Assessment Year 2012-13) in favour of assessee, hence, AO was directed to retain the addition @ 9.25% and balance addition might be deleted. Thus, appeal of the Revenue was partly allowed.
|
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 68 - Estimation of income - Bogus purchases
Revenue filed this appeal against the order of CIT(A) contending that he had erred in deleting the addition made by AO on account of disallowance of bogus expenses. Assessee stated that similar issue was already decided in favour of the assessee by ITAT in the group case of assessee, i.e. M/s. Becon Constructions (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi in ITA No. 5034/Del/2016, vide Order dated 24-12-2020 : 2021 TaxPub(DT) 0013 (Del-Trib). He further stated that in the said case the gross profit rate of assessee was @9.25% and Bench had directed AO to retain the addition @9.25% of the bogus purchases. Held: Tribunal had decided the exactly similar issue in the case of M/s. Becon Constructions (P) Ltd. v. ACIT in ITA No. 5034/Del/22016 (Assessment Year 2012-13) in favour of assessee, hence, AO was directed to retain the addition @ 9.25% and balance addition might be deleted. Thus, appeal of the Revenue was partly allowed.
Followed:CIT-I v. Simit P Sheth (2013) 356 ITR 451 (Guj) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 2115 (Guj-HC), M/s. Becon Constructions (P) Ltd. v. ACIT ITA No. 5034/Del/2016 (Assessment Year 2012-13), vide Order dated 24-12-2020 : 2021 TaxPub(DT) 0013 (Del-Trib) .
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Partly in assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2011-12
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT |