TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 1109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition of ₹ 24,93,385/- made on the ground of undisclosed sales. (2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A.) has erred both on facts and in law by deleting ₹ 9,522/- made on the ground of unsupported expenditure claimed on account of subscription and donation. ITA No. 2262/Kol./2010 (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A.) is justified by taking income @ 25% on undisclosed sales without considering corresponding purchases and other expenses when the appellant disclosed GP @ 13.88%. (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A.) is justified by confirming the income @ 25% of undisclosed sales when s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... around 3.17%. He observed that neither of these figures would be appropriate in respect of suppressed sales. He also stated that assessee s investment in making these unaccounted purchases has to be considered. Keeping in view of the above facts, ld. CIT(Appeals) has considered an amount equivalent to 25% of the unaccounted sales as assessee s undisclosed income, which comes to ₹ 8,31,129/-. Accordingly, he confirmed the addition of ₹ 8,31,129/- being 25% of unaccounted sales and deleted the balance amount out of ₹ 33,24,513.92. Hence, the assessee as well as the Department are in appeals before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that the assessee finally agreed that the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has not disputed that there was unaccounted sales aggregating ₹ 33,24,513.92 in the assessment year under consideration. At the time of hearing, ld. A.R. submitted that net profit rate of 25% as considered by ld. CIT(Appeals) is excessive. During the course of hearing, he referred page 96 of the paper book to justify his stand that in the preceding and succeeding assessment years to the assessment year under consideration, the maximum gross profit was 15.99%. However, we find merit in the contention of ld. D.R. that ld. CIT(Appeals) has not made any separate addition on account of any initial investment that might had been made by the assessee for making initial purchases outside books of accounts. It is also a fact that most o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
