TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 951X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case, the ITAT was justified in confirming the action of authorities below in making double addition of the surrendered amount of ₹ 43 lacs which stood added in the profit and loss account and thereby adding the same independently while computing the taxable/ assessed income of the appellant company which is against the established principles of law as so held in the case of Laxmipati Singhania v. CIT, UP 72 ITR 291 (SC)? B) Whether the ITAT was justified in upholding the order of authorities below in rejecting the duly audited books of accounts u/s 145(1) without specifying any specific defect or discrepancy in the books of accounts irrespective of the fact for any discrepancies found during survey an amount of ₹ 43 la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 79% only. The net profit for the year under consideration was ₹ 25,75,178/- and after making adjustment including current depreciation, the income came to ₹ 26,93,645/- and after adjusting unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years, the income was ₹ 2,46,276/-. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 27.12.2007 while holding that the G.P. rate of the assessee was low made an addition of ₹ 43 lacs. Penalty proceedings were also initiated separately against the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee approached the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short the CIT(A) ]. The CIT(A) vide order dated 23.12.2008 upheld the order of the Assessing Officer in principle but had sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s; (ii) ₹ 12,00,000/- on account of maximum negative cash in hand in the books during the period from 1.4.2004 to 8.12.2004; (iii) ₹ 15,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits in the books of account as on 8.12.2004. 6. The assessee had declared the surrendered amount of ₹ 43 lacs on account of specific discrepancies which was not relatable to any manufacturing activity. The assessee as per its letter had surrendered the aforesaid amount to cover the discrepancies in cash, stocks and unexplained cash credits. Thus, the income disclosed by the assessee for the assessment year in question ought to be more by this amount. However, the assessee disclosed an income of ₹ 27,96,824/- including the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervations regarding the fluctuations in the prices of the raw material and quality of the raw material etc., there are no specific reasons pointed out for the lower yield and the higher burning/production loss during the year. In our view, the explanation has been rightly rejected by the Assessing Officer. For the aforesaid reasons, we find justifiable reasons with the Assessing Officer to have held the book results declared by the assessee as unreliable. In so far as the adoption of the G.P. rate of 5.51% to compute the income is concerned, herein also we find no reasons to interfere with the action of the Assessing Officer. The CIT(Appeals) has varied the additions by a sum of ₹ 2,89,000/- on account of re-computing the turnover of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
