Ravinder Singh Sethi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-24(1)
Parties Involved
Facts Summary
The assessment in this case was completed under sections 143(3), 143(3A), and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 15-02-2021. The AO held that the book results declared by the assessee could not be relied upon due to various discrepancies. Consequently, the business profits were determined at 8% of the returned turnover under section 44AD of the Act, and an amount of Rs. 1,43,08,798/- was brought to tax under the head 'income from business and profession'. The assessed income was determined at Rs. 4,60,73,300/-. The assessee appealed this order before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, who confirmed the AO's order. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). During the hearing, the assessee's representative argued that the AO did not fully consider the information and documentation submitted by the assessee, especially during the Covid period. The assessee requested that the matter be remitted to the AO for fresh examination.…
Decision in favour of
Assessee
Legal Issues
- 1. Whether the AO correctly estimated the business profits under section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without considering the assessee's submissions and documentation.
Judgment Outcome
Decided in favour of Assessee.
Similar Judgements
FINDMY PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ITO, WARD 5(1)(3), NEW DELHI
Delhi Bench ‘F’ benchAY 2018-19AllowedMr. Rajendra Shakharam Badgujar Vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(2) Vejalpur Ahmedabad
Ahmedabad benchAmbuja Neotia Hotel Ventures Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 8(1)
Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-15Partly AllowedHitachi Astemo Haryana P. Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Delhi Bench ‘I’, Delhi benchAY 2016-17DismissedMr. Ramesh Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 43(2), New Delhi
Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18AllowedRashmi Seventilal Vakharia vs. Income Tax Officer
Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed