CIT Vs. KAILASH KACCHAWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for the appellant, we 1 are of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The respondent was admittedly a contractor for civil construction and the assessment in question is for the first year of his business and after rejecting his books of account, the assessing officer passed the assessment order. The assessment was made by the assessing officer on the basis of applying the net profit rate of 12.5 per cent, on the turnover shown by the assessee. The assessing officer has also made additions on account of unexplained cash credit found in his books of account.

(2.) THE Commissioner (Appeals) in appeal gave a relief in 2 lump sum and deleted the additions made on account of unexplained cash credit by holding that this being the first year of the business of the assessee and the additions made in the returned income is offsets cash credits in respect of which additions made by the assessing officer. He was of the opinion that in the very first year when the additions in the returned income are made' as if it was undisclosed income for that year and cash credit entries in the books in that very year the source of such cash credit can be attributed to such additions made. That being the position, double additions of the same income was not justified.

(3.) APPARENTLY in application of estimate to make best judgment assessment, there is bound to be some guess work and one cannot expect pointed exactitude in assessments considering the case of very first year of business variation in net profit rate applied to declared turnover of the assessee by the assessing officer and the Commissioner (Appeals) and also taking into account the provisions of Section 44AD adopting 8 per cent, net profit rate as criterion for assessing minimum income from such business, restricted the assessee's income from business at 8 per cent, net profit rate. Such a finding does not give rise to a question of law.