Late Sh. Durga Prasad vs Income Tax Officer

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appe als)/Addl. JCIT (A)-1 (for short, ‘CIT(A)’ ), Jaipur’ s order dated 24.12.2025 passed in DIN & order No . ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26 /1084055872 (1) dated 24 .12.2025, involving proceedings u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, “the Act”.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

Delay of 128 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

It is evident at the outset during the course of hearing that the sole substantive issue raised at the assessee’s behest is that of correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ assessment and lower appellate findings subjecting his entire cash deposits/credits of Rs. 414761/- to a lumpsump GP estimation @ 30%.

That being the case, it is made clear that there is much a dispute about the assessee, since deceased, was engaged in auto spare parts business etc. It is next noticed that both the learned lower author ities have simply estimated a much exorbitant GP estimation @ 30 % without even discussing the corresponding market comparables in the aforesaid business as well. It is thus deem appropriate in the lar ger interest of justice that a lumpsump GP estimation 5% in the assessee’s case would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as precedent. N ecessary co mputatio n shall follow as per law. No other gro und or arguments has been pressed.

This assessee’s appe al is partly allowed.