GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 175 - ITAT JAIPUR

2015 (9) TMI 175 - ITAT JAIPUR - TMI - G.P. addition - CIT(A) reducing the G.P. rate on the turnover - Held that:- It is undisputed fact that the assessee did not produce complete books of account with vouchers for verification by the assessee as the assessment was made U/s 144 of the Act. However, the ld CIT(A) had called for remand report from the Assessing Officer, who has proposed the G.P. rate after verification of the certain bills @ 30.73% as against 25.35% applied by the Assessing Office .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

R. Therefore, we uphold the order of the ld CIT(A). - Decided against revenue

Unexplained loan - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- CIT(A) admitted the additional evidence even without passing order on admitting the additional evidence in his order. The assessee had not furnished any evidence before the Assessing Officer as he was non-cooperative at the time of assessment proceedings. Even creditors are assessed with the same Assessing Officer. It is settled law that the assessee h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

RI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, JJ. For The Revenue : Shri Kailash Mangal (JCIT) For The Assessee : Shri G.G. Mundra (C.A.) ORDER PER: BENCH This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order dated 31/08/2012 passed by the learned CIT (A), Kota for A.Y. 2009-10. The respective grounds of appeal are as under:- On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in - (i) reducing the G.P. rate on the turnover without any valid and genuine basis thereby deleting ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

x Act, 1961 (in short the Act) was passed by the Assessing Officer. The ld Assessing Officer issued notice U/s 143(2) of the Act on 28/09/2010 and fixing the case for hearing on 18/10/2010. The assessee sought adjournment on that date. The Assessing Officer again issued notice U/s 142(1) alongwith questionnaire dated 16/5/2011 and case was fixed for 02/6/2011. Again the assessee sought adjournment and case was adjourned for 16/6/2011. On 16/6/2011, Shri R. C. Sharma, Advocate attended and filed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by Master Vaidik Sharma to assessee the tax or not. There was another unsecured loan in the name of Smt. Lalita Sharma, for which confirmation was asked to file by the Assessing Officer. Other queries on account of income from house property and house purchased at Aditya Awas at ₹ 23,66,600/- was asked to explain with acquisition of plot, construction and amount invested. This case was fixed for 01/7/2011 but again sought adjournment. The case was adjourned to 13/7/2011. On 13/7/2011, no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.08% in preceding year. The assessee had not produced the books of account, purchase bills, sales bills, vouchers of expenditure etc. for verification. Further the assessee had shown closing stock of ₹ 38,23,004/- but no stock inventory of closing stock filed or produced for verification, which was also not subject to verification. In absence of complete books and vouchers, the sale of the assessee was estimated at ₹ 1.05 crores as sale disclosed by the assessee at ₹ 1,02,15,34 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sion, there were bills with discount of 20% and the profit on such sales was less than 5%. The ld CIT(A) had calculated the G.P. on normal sale @ 23.50% in place of 25.35% applied by the Assessing Officer. He further held that the assessee sold goods in Sale on two occasions and it can be reasonable estimated that 15% of goods were sold in such sales and the G.P. on such sales was 5%. Based on G.P. calculated by the ld CIT(A), the average G.P. has been worked out @ 20.72% and gross profit of  .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

plete details of sale, purchase & stock were maintained on computer. The assessee thus maintained record at the best it could do, though assessee did not maintained day to day stock - register in a stock book form as it is not practicable to maintain such details. In the case of Ashoka Refractories P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 457 it is held that the absence of stock register or failure to maintain itemwise stock register, books of accounts cannot be rejected unless there is a finding or o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sale declared same G.P. rate as of last year. The Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the same case of Kansara Bearing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 270 ITR 235 has held that last year s profit declared is the best guide to estimate the profit rate. Similar view has been taken by Hon ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Lakhani Shoes Ltd. 34 TW 32 and in the case of J. C. Sharma Vs. ITO 33 TW 80. Thus the assessing officer should have accepted declared results instead off applying a G.P. rate of 25.35% .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

proceedings in his report worked G.P. rate taking certain transactions and worked out G.P. @ 30% - 33% on these bills but the same was wrong as it was calculated on purchase price instead of sale price as declared G.P. is being compared on sale price. The Ld. CIT (A) held such G.P. works out @ 23.50% on sales as per report of Ld. A.O. and also took into consideration the discount sales. Therefore, the ld CIT(A) finally calculated the G.P. @ 20.725%, which comes to ₹ 3,29,950/- and remainin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rate after verification of the certain bills @ 30.73% as against 25.35% applied by the Assessing Officer. However, the ld CIT(A) found defect in the computation of G.P. rate, which was calculated on purchases bill but as per accountancy, the G.P. rate is always calculated on sale, which has rightly been applied by the ld CIT(A). After examining the defect, the ld CIT(A) came to conclusion that 20.72% G.P. rate is applicable in assessee s case on enhanced sale. Therefore, the ld CIT(A) has thorou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee was asked to explain vide letter dated 16/5/2011 to explain the source of the loan with confirmation but the assessee did not file any confirmation. Therefore, total addition of ₹ 14,39,589/-was made U/s 68 of the Act. 8. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who had allowed the appeal by observing that Smt. Lalita Sharma is mother of the assessee, she had opening balance of ₹ 2,24,161/- and during the y .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version