9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... knowledge that he had no jurisdiction. 2. That the ld. lower authorities were not justified in law and on facts of the case in invoking provisions of Section 145(2) and in making trading addition without any cogent reason and evidence. 3. That the ld. lower authorities grossly erred in law and on facts of the case in disallowing various expenses mere on assumption of personal element and some of them being self made vouchers. 4. The appellant prays your honour indulgence to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any grounds of appeal on or before hearing." 2. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing of cotton cloths. During the course of scrutiny assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceding years. The ld AR also drawn our attention to the G.P. rate disclosed by the assessee during the year under consideration as well as the G.P. rate of the earlier two years which as under: Asstt. Year Sale Gross Profit G.P. rate 2012-13 331647410 17849130 3.18% 2013-14 456508440 23995201 5.26% 2014-15 518619995 27747902 5.35% He further submitted that in earlier year, security assessments were completed wherein results shown by the assessee was accepted. As per the ld AR, the G.P. shown during the year at 5.35% is much better than the G.P. shown in the earlier year which is 3.18% for the A.T. 2012-14 and 5.26% for the A.Y. 2013-14. Accordingly, it was prayed that no trading addition was warranted merely by rejecting th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s much better than the G.P. rate of earlier two years. Accordingly, we do not find any justification for the trading addition so made by the Assessing Officer. 8. The assessee is also aggrieved for disallowance of expenses of Rs. 45,088/-. 9. In this regard we observe that the Assessing Officer has made ad hoc disallowances in respect of telephone, travelling and vehicle expenses etc. on ad hoc basis by observing that a personal element cannot be ruled out. In this regard we observe that the assessee being a corporate entity, no disallowance can be made on the ground of personal use in view of the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax 253 ITR 749 (Gujarat). Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
