TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). From the facts noted hereinabove, it is evident that the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) are based upon concurrent findings of fact recorded after appreciating the evidence on record and hence, do not give rise to any question of law. - Decided against revenue Unaccounted cash credit - addition u/s 68 deleted by ITAT - Held that:- This court finds substance in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, hence, admit. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration:- “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in upholding the deletion of addition of ₹ 39,43,083/- made under sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer rejected the book result under section 145(3) of the Act by relying on several judicial decisions. After rejecting the books of accounts, the Assessing Officer carried out independent search on Prowess data base and found out comparable companies for calculating gross profit of the assessee company. After comparison of the gross profit and taking average thereof, the Assessing Officer adopted the gross profit of the company at 2.74% and made a total addition of ₹ 4,30,19,408/-. In the assessee s appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection of the books of account. He, however, observed that the Assessing Officer had committed a mistake in working out the gross profit margin of the assessee by taking increase in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). From the facts noted hereinabove, it is evident that the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) are based upon concurrent findings of fact recorded after appreciating the evidence on record and hence, do not give rise to any question of law. The second question, therefore, is disallowed. 4. As regards the proposed question [A], this court finds substance in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, hence, admit . The following substantial question of law arises for consideration:- Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in upholding the deletion of addition of ₹ 39,43,083/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
