Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 724 - AT - Income TaxRejection of book results - estimating income from iron and steel business and textile business by applying higher GP rate of 10% and 20% respectively - Held that:- It is observed that while applying GP rate of 10% in respect of business of dealing in iron and steel, the reliance was placed by the A.O. on the comparative GP rates shown in the range of 5 to 10%. However, as admitted by the A.O. in the remand report forwarded to the ld. CIT(A), there were no specific comparable cases available on record to show such GP rates and the range of 5 to 10% was stated to be gathered by him from the information collected from the market. Having regard to all these facts of the case, we are of the view that it would be fair and reasonable to adopt a GP rate of 5% in respect of business of the assessee of trading in iron and steel products. We therefore modify the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the A.O. to recompute the income of the assessee by applying GP rate of 15 & 5 % in respect of textile business and iron and steel business respectively. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Disallowance of godown rent - Held that:- As no evidence whatsoever has been filed by the assessee to show that any godown was actually used for the purpose of the business or any rent for godown was actually paid. We therefore find no justifiable reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of godown rent - Decided against assessee. Disallowance of telephone expenses, staff welfare expenses and motor car expenses including depreciation - Held that:- Assessee has not raised any material contention on this issue except stating that the disallowance of 20% of the total expenses made by the A.O. and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is on the higher side and the same may be restricted at certain reasonable level. It is, however, observed that a similar disallowance of 20% was made by the A.O. out of conveyance, traveling and telephone expenses claimed by the assessee in the immediately preceding year i.e. 2006-07 for personal and unverifiable element involved therein and nothing has been brought on record before us to show that the same was challenged by the assessee. We therefore find no justifiable reason to hold that the similar disallowance of 20% made for the year under consideration is excessive or unreasonable and upholding the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the said disallowance - Decided against assessee.
|