For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Ground no. 1 is relates to confirming addition of 10,58,063/- being difference in contract receipts. The AO found that the assessee has shown contract receipts of 80,90,655/- as against contract receipts of 91,48,7818/- shown in the Form-16A (TDS certificate). Thus, there was difference an amount of 10,58,063/- Held that—We find that the total receipts are not taxable as only profit element is required to be taxed. Therefore considering the various decisions of Coordinate Benches we consider 10% net profit of the amount ofRs.10,58,063/- as profit earned by the assessee in respect of these gross receipts as per contract. The AO directed to work out the net profit accordingly and the balance addition is therefore deleted. This ground of appeal is partly allowed. Ground no. 2 is relates to confirming the addition of 5,29,746/- treating the same as contract receipts. Held that—There is a difference on account of opening balance in respect of ledger accents with the assessee and ledger accounts of Vaman Prestressing Co. Pvt. Ltd., hence the amount of 5,29,764/- has been rightly added by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). The contention of the AR that only net profit is to be taxed is without any basis as this difference is on account of actual receipts, hence, the said income remained to be taxed; accordingly this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Ground no. 3 relates to addition of 60,000/- made towards kitchen expenses.
Held that—No merit in confirmation of such addition, accordingly same is directed to be deleted; this ground of appeal of assessee is therefore allowed. Ground no. 4 relates to confirming addition of 75,000/- made towards labour expense.
Held that—AO has made disallowance of 75,000/- pertaining to labour expenses out of total expenses of 57,05,271/-. However, we find that disallowance made without any specific defect pointing out by the AO, therefore such disallowance of 75,000/- are directed to be deleted. Ground no. 5 relates to addition made towards travelling expenses.
Held that—Disallowance of 20% considering the same as personal in nature, hence, the element of personal use of travelling does not denied. No infirmity in the order of CIT(A), accordingly the same is confirmed. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed. Last ground relates to addition made towards vehicle expenses.
Held that—AO has made disallowance @10% considering the personal element in respect of use of vehicles therefore we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A), accordingly the same is upheld. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 37, 69 of Income Tax Act, 1961— In the instant case, appeal is filed by assessee.

Ground no. 1 is relates to confirming addition of 10,58,063/- being difference in contract receipts. The AO found that the assessee has shown contract receipts of 80,90,655/- as against contract receipts of 91,48,7818/- shown in the Form-16A (TDS certificate). Thus, there was difference an amount of 10,58,063/-

Held that—We find that the total receipts are not taxable as only profit element is required to be taxed. Therefore considering the various decisions of Coordinate Benches we consider 10% net profit of the amount ofRs.10,58,063/- as profit earned by the assessee in respect of these gross receipts as per contract. The AO directed to work out the net profit accordingly and the balance addition is therefore deleted. This ground of appeal is partly allowed.

Ground no. 2 is relates to confirming the addition of 5,29,746/- treating the same as contract receipts.

Held that—There is a difference on account of opening balance in respect of ledger accents with the assessee and ledger accounts of Vaman Prestressing Co. Pvt. Ltd., hence the amount of 5,29,764/- has been rightly added by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). The contention of the AR that only net profit is to be taxed is without any basis as this difference is on account of actual receipts, hence, the said income remained to be taxed; accordingly this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Ground no. 3 relates to addition of 60,000/- made towards kitchen expenses.
Held that—No merit in confirmation of such addition, accordingly same is directed to be deleted; this ground of appeal of assessee is therefore allowed.

Ground no. 4 relates to confirming addition of 75,000/- made towards labour expense.
Held that—AO has made disallowance of 75,000/- pertaining to labour expenses out of total expenses of 57,05,271/-. However, we find that disallowance made without any specific defect pointing out by the AO, therefore such disallowance of 75,000/- are directed to be deleted.

Ground no. 5 relates to addition made towards travelling expenses.
Held that—Disallowance of 20% considering the same as personal in nature, hence, the element of personal use of travelling does not denied. No infirmity in the order of CIT(A), accordingly the same is confirmed. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed.

Last ground relates to addition made towards vehicle expenses.
Held that—AO has made disallowance @10% considering the personal element in respect of use of vehicles therefore we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A), accordingly the same is upheld. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed.[PRAKASHCHANDRA A. PILLAI, C/O. VAMAN PRESTRESSING CO. PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, SURENDRANAGAR.] [2018] [7] [ITCD Online] [78] [ITAT RAJKOT]