Sh. Manoj Garg vs ACIT

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.7295 & 7346/Del/2025 for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders, both dated 17.09.2025 passed in case nos. CIT(A), Delhi-17 10512/2016-17 and 10209/2017-18, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

We notice at the outset that the assessee’s instant twin appeals raise its identical sole substantive grievance of GP estimation of its entire turnover @ 1%; involving varying sums in the twin assessment orders herein resulting in the impugned additions of Rs.2,55,46,068/- and Rs. 2,90,57,238/- followed by enhancement to the extent of 3% thereof in the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion.

This is what leaves the assessee aggrieved.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s vehement submissions reiterating their respective stands against and in support of the impugned identical addition. Suffice to say, the Assessing Officer holds in both the impugned assessments that the assessee had not only failed to prove its business activity in both these years but also the corresponding purpose of his banking transactions could not be substantiated in his case which made him to reject the books of account followed by GP estimation at a uniform rate of 1% in issue. Learned CIT(A) sought to enhance the same @ 2% in assessment year 2014-15 wherein he ended up in computing the same @ 3% in question.

That being the case, the Revenue could hardly refer to any supportive material justifying the impugned enhanced GP estimation @ 3% in the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion. The fact also remains that such accommodation entries/sham transactions do involve same profit element as well which could not be altogether denied. We thus deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts that the assessee’s GP estimation @ 1.5% in both these assessment years would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. We order accordingly. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.7295 & 7346/Del/2025 are partly allowed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.