Chandan Singh Rana Vs CIT(Appeals) (ITAT Delhi)
In the case abovementioned ITAT Delhi remanded the matter to AO for fresh adjudication after observing that there is difference in estimation in previous AY.
AO made addition of Rs. 22,89,114/- by estimating 8% of the gross receipts from sale of Airtel recharge coupons. AO, further, made addition of Rs.2,22,376/- u/s. 69A on account of difference between the amount deposited in the account from sales and the amount transferred to Aircel.
CIT (A) confirmed the additions.
It was argued on behalf of assessee that in the preceding AY, the margin of the assessee from the sale of recharge coupons was 1.75% (approx) and the same was accepted by the Department. Estimation of profit margin at 8% by AO is very much on higher side. Assessee placed ITRs of the preceding AYs. On the other side revenue argued that assessee has failed to substantiate its claim before the lower authorities, and he cannot be allowed to furnish fresh evidence at this second appellate stage.
ITAT held that there is no change in the business conducted by the assessee or the profit margins in the impugned AY. Assessee placed ITR pertaining to preceding AY in support of his contention. ITAT restore the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.
