IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
              DELHI BENCHES : D : NEW DELHI

  BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JM

                 ITA Nos.1814 & 1816/Del/2014
             Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2009-10


Jaguar Enterprises,         Vs.   DCIT,
232/234, Shopping Complex         Circle-32(1),
Flyover,                          New Delhi.
Defence Colony,
New Delhi.

PAN : AAAFJ0020D

  (Appellant)                        (Respondent)


           Assessee By       : Shri Atul Puri, CA
           Department By     : Shri S.N. Bhatia, Sr.DR


                            ORDER

PER C.M.GARG, J.M.:


     These two appeals filed by the assessee based on similar

facts and almost similar grounds relating to assessment years

2007-08 and 2009-10 arise out of a common order passed by the

ld. CIT(A) on 21.02.14.
                                                ITA Nos.1814 & 1816/Del/2014


2.    It is relevant to mention that the appeal of the assessee for

the A.Y. 2008-09 was fixed in this batch of appeals. Even the

impugned order also covers the       A.Y.2008-09. The submissions

were made by both the sides qua the appeal for the A.Y. 2008-09.

In so far as the present appeals are concerned, both the parties

have adopted their arguments made for the A.Y. 2008-09, for

which we have passed a separate order.







3. As the facts and circumstances of these two appeals are

mutatis mutandis similar to those for the A.Y. 2008-09, following

the view taken there in, we hold that the ld. CIT(A) was not

justified in holding that : -


a. 8% net profit rate be applied on the amount of `Other Clearing

expenses', which was reimbursed by the clients to the assessee;

and


b. provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable on the

`Godown rent' paid by the assessee for its clients as the assessee

did not claim any deduction for such amounts.




                                 2
                                                    ITA Nos.1814 & 1816/Del/2014


4.        The grounds regarding initiation of re-assessment were not

pressed by the ld. AR. The same, therefore, stand dismissed.







5.        In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed.



          The order pronounced in the open court on 03.07.2014.

               Sd/-                                       Sd/-

    [R.S. SYAL]                                      [C.M. GARG]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                  JUDICIAL MEMBER


Dated, 03th July, 2014.

dk

Copy forwarded to:

     1.   Appellant
     2.   Respondent
     3.   CIT
     4.   CIT (A)
     5.   DR, ITAT

                                                   AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI




                                      3