TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the provisions of section 145(1) and the estimated GP rate of 8 per cent applied by the Assessing Officer was quite fair and reasonable keeping in view the assessee s total inability to properly correlate the various expenses incurred with each different site of works. 2. In deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,000 on account of non-genuine purchases despite the fact that the alleged seller had denied having made any such sale to the assessee." 2. At the time of hearing of the appeal the submission of the ld. AR for the assessee was that the provisions of section 145 of the IT Act have wrongly been invoked by the assessee. It was the case of the assessee that the provisions of section 145 of the IT Act can only be invoked when there is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years the assessee had executed the work of bigger magnitude and in a work of bigger magnitude cost factor are more and profitability lesser while in the intervening years the assessee had executed the work of smaller magnitude in which there is more profitability. The ld. AR would further contend that for the year 1991-92 the total cost of the work executed was 177 lakhs while in the year under consideration the work executed was to the tune of 209.50 lakhs. According to the ld. AR any work of bigger magnitude when it is taken on various stretches the co-relation of the construction material and payment of wages is a difficult. The ld. AR would further contend that the Assessing Officer had verified 80 to 90 per cent of the purchases by i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitude of work. 8. In this view of the matter we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) on this ground and, therefore, have no hesitation in confirming the same. 9. This brings us to Ground No. 2 of the appeal wherein the CIT(A) has deleted an addition of Rs. 1.50 lakhs on account of purchases claimed to have been made by the assessee. At the time of hearing of the appeal on this ground we put across to the ld. AR for the assessee to point out the discussion of the CIT(A) on this issue and the basis for deletion because of the fact that the parties to whom the purchases have been claimed to have been made had denied any connection or any transaction with M/s. Satyam Industries or with the appellant. To this the ld. AR very fai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
