Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle - 1(1), Muzaffarpur v. M/S Singh Construction Pvt. Ltd. Satpura Colony, Aghoria Bazar, Muzaffarpur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Appeal No.170 of 2019 ======================================================1.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Muzaffarpur 2.Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 1(1), Muzaffarpur ... ... Appellant/s Versus M/s Singh Construction Pvt. ltd. Satpura Colony, Aghoria Bazar, Muzaffarpur ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================Appearance :For the Appellant/s: Ms. Shilpi Keshri, AdvFor the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) Date : 04-02-2021 Being aggrieved by order dated 26.09.2018 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna inI.T.A No.147/Pat/2018 for assessment year 2014-15, presentMiscellaneous appeal has been filed by Revenue. Assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) against theorder passed by the assessing authority which was allowedand aggrieved by said order, revenue filed appeal before theITAT which was dismissed against which, present miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the revenue. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patnadismissed the appeal filed by revenue, operative part of whichreads as follows:- “3. Mr. Sinha vehemently contends during the course ofhearing that the Assessing Officer had rightly made thedisallowance for lack of substantiation of the expenditurein question at the assessee’s behest during the course ofscrutiny. We make it clear that the department is fairenough in not disputing all other heads of turn over,income and expenditure per se. It only seeks to revive theimpugned estimation. The CIT(A)’s above extractedfindings hold that the assessee has already declared itsprofits in tune with various jurisdictional precedentsrelating to contract business. He has properly kept in mindthe said profit rate @ 6%(supra for modifying theimpugned disallowance from 4% to 1%. LearnedDepartmental Representative fails to indicate any illegalityor irregularity therein at the time of hearing. It transpiresthat the Assessing Officer had not even comparedassessee’s expenditure claims with those allowed in earlierassessment years under various heads. We therefore affirmCIT(A)’s findings granting part relief to the tax payer. Theinstant lead appeal ITA No. 146/Pat/2018 fails.” This Court does not find any error or infirmity in theorder dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. Accordingly, this miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- AFR/NAFRNAFRCAV DATENAUploading DateTransmission DateNA