Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 435 - AT - Income TaxG.P. addition on insulated scrap - CIT(A) restricted the addition - Held that:- Finding of the ld.CIT(A), it is evident that the same is based on sound reasoning and material placed before him. As per the FIFO method, the G. P. rate in respect of insulated scrap for A. Y. 2005-06 was 7.65% whereas for A. Y. 2006-07, it was 1.11%, However, by LOT to LOT method, the G. P. rate for last year was 3.26% as against 1.66% for the present year. After considering all the facts, and circumstances, it would meet the ends of justice if G, P. rate for the current year is taken @ 5%. The appellant has already shown a G. P. rate of 1.66%. Accordingly, the addition @ 3.34% of the G. P. which works out to ₹ 12,81,410/- is sustained in respect of insulated scrap.The other major items of scrap which can be compared with the figures of previous year is cables and wires mtrs. There is a decline of about 2% in the present year. Considering all the facts and circumstances, it would be judicious to make an addition on account of decline of G. P. rate by increasing the G. P. by 1%. After applying this rate to the sale of the present year, the addition on this account comes to ₹ 1,97,134/-. The ld.Sr.DR could not controvert the finding by placing any contrary material on record. Moreover, the Assessing Officer has not given any basis for estimating the profit on lump sum basis. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere into the finding of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of commission expenses - CIT(A) allowed the claim - Held that:-The A. O. had made an addition of ₹ 2,08,802/- as the appellant could not furnish complete name and address of the persons to whom above commission was paid. It has been submitted by the appellant that the TDS has been made u/s. 194H and copies of Form 60A was also filed by him before the A. O. He has given complete details mentioning the Address, PAN and the amount of commission paid to 3 persons. The A. O. in his remand report has not given any comments on the information submitted by the appellant. Since, the appellant has given necessary details for verification of commission expenses such as name and address of the person, PAN, confirmation of the person as well as Form 16A which was issued to the person to whom the commission was paid, the A. O. was not justified in disallowing the commission. No reason to interfere into the finding of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. - Decided against revenue.
|