TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relates to the deletion of addition made on account of suppressed profits from the unrecorded sale. Second issue relates to the additions made u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act. 3. In connection with the first issue, stating that these appeals are filed by the Revenue, Ld. Counsel mentioned that the first issue relating to suppression of profit on unrecorded sale was bone of contention before the Tribunal in other years and it was decided in favour of the assessee by the order of this Tribunal in connection with the ITA No. 1764 and 1764/PN/07 for the A.Y 1999-00 and 2000-01 dated 15-10-2010. Further, it was informed that the above decision was affirmed by the another order of this Tribunal in connection with the ITA No. 1379/PN/07 for the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case as discussed hereinabove, it is evident that the A.O has attempted to extrapolate turnover of the assessee on the basis of diary which has recorded deposits of goods only for the period from 1-5- 2004 to 22-9-2004. On due appreciation of facts and circumstances of the case, the first appellate authority has arrived at the conclusion that there was no basis for the impugned backward extrapolation of the turnover especially when no incriminating evidence or material was found consequent upon the search to demonstrate that in the past years as well, the assessee was indulged in suppression of sales. Moreover, the admitted position is that the assessee has maintained regular books of accounts stated to be covered under tax audit repor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsupported backward extrapolation of the turnover was not based upon or supported by any incriminating material for the years under consideration thought the revenue department and taken an extreme step of search at the premises of the assessee. We hereby confirm the findings of the learned CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds of the revenue. 5. From the above it is evident that there is no incriminating material for supporting the Revenue s allegations that there is suppression of sales for all these three years. In such circumstances, the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee by our orders referred above. In the result, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 6. Regarding the second issue of additions made u/s. 68, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
