TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground to reject the books of account of the assessee. No specific defect in the maintenance of the books of account by the assessee has been pointed out AO. - decision of CIT(A) and ITAT upheld - decided against the revenue. Regarding excessive expenditure, it was held that, the AO has not pointed out which of the expenditure were not admissible in law. - no addition - Decided against the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition of Rs. 24,43,330/- made on account of excessive claim of depreciation on moulds and dyes at 25% instead of 40%?" Question No.1 pertains to the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of low gross profit. The Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal, however, deleted such addition after examining the material on record. In particular, the Tribunal while upholding th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l the records are maintained on computer including by the government and semi government organizations. Even if, records are maintained on computer is not ground to reject the explanation of the assessee. The AO should have verified the entries from the computerized records also to point out any defect thereon. In the absence of any specific defect pointed out in the books of account and the recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observations : "6. On consideration of the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal of the revenue. The AO merely made comparative study of the expenses for the year under consideration with the preceding assessment year and found that expenses incurred in the preceding assessment year were 2.89% on turnover but in the assessment year under appeal it was 4.78% on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce, addition as made by the Assessing Officer was not justified, we are not inclined to interfere. With respect to the third question, we notice that identical issue had come up before this Court in Tax Appeal No.97 of 2000, wherein, relying on the earlier decision of this Court in the case of the same assessee concerning identical question, such question was not entertained. In the result, Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
