Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (9) TMI 975

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ufficient opportunity was given to produce the records. The estimation had to be done once the assessee was not cooperating. In such circumstances, a substantial relief has already been derived by the appellant/assessee. We do not think that we should reappraise and re-appreciate the same factual materials. We cannot arrive at a different conclusion merely because that would be possible. On the other hand, what we find is that such reappreciation and reappraisal is impermissible in law. More so, when there is no perversity in the findings of the Tribunal. Its view is imminently possible. We do not find any merit in the appeal. It is dismissed. - Income Tax Appeal No. 449 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 12-9-2017 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And Prakash .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pellant was regularly assessed to tax and assessment orders have been passed in its case for the past 10 out of 12 years, there was no objection to the books of account and the method of accounting adopted. During the Assessment Year 200708, the Assessing Officer sought various details for the purposes of completion of the assessment. The appellant attended the office of the Assessing Officer on the stipulated dates and produced all the records. The datewise summary is placed as Annexure E to the present memo of appeal. 6. Then, there was another notice issued on 1-12-2009 by the Assessing Officer, copy of which is at AnnexureF and in response to which as well, the appellant addressed a letter of 11-12-2009. It was pointed out that insof .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessing Officer did transpired and the Commissioner further reduced the gross profit at 9% as opposed to 9.78% taken by the Assessing Officer. 10. Before the Tribunal all these materials were produced and it was urged that as in other two disallowances/additions, even on this point if the matter is sent back, the ends of justice would be served. However, even such a reasonable stand of the assessee was rejected by the Tribunal on flimsy and untenable reasons. Therefore, even these remaining questions are substantial questions of law. 11. Upon a perusal of the appeal paperbook and the order under challenge, and particularly the relevant paragraph of the Tribunal's order, we are unable to agree. 12. It is found by the Tribunal t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .78% of sales as against 7.43% of sales declared by the assessee. 13. The First Appellate Authority found that the Assessing Officer compared the gross profit with those declared in earlier years. The First Appellate Authority found that in a best judgment assessment there is always a certain degree of guess work. If the books of account and relevant records were not produced by the assessee, then, he has to blame himself. The First Appellate Authority on an independent scrutiny found that there is arbitrariness in adopting the gross profit rate at 9.7% which is higher than the rate of 9.16% of the immediate preceding year even though there has been increase in turnover by ₹ 50.83 crores. It is in these circumstances and deriving t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 191, of the Tribunal's order is not vitiated by the alleged non-consideration of the grievance of the appellant/assessee that fair and reasonable opportunity was denied to it. The Tribunal found from the record that more than adequate and sufficient opportunity was given to produce the records. The estimation had to be done once the assessee was not cooperating. In such circumstances, a substantial relief has already been derived by the appellant/assessee. We do not think that we should reappraise and reappreciate the same factual materials. We cannot arrive at a different conclusion merely because that would be possible. On the other hand, what we find is that such reappreciation and reappraisal is impermissible in law. More so, whe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates