TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lared by the assessee – held that action of AO was justified – held that proviso to section 145(1) can be invoked not only where the method employed is not proper but also where the accounts are not correct and complete - 64 of 2000 - - - Dated:- 26-9-2006 - ADARSH KUAMR GOEL and RAJESH BINDAL JJ. Rakesh Garg for the appellant. Dr. N. L. Sharda for the respondents. JUDGMENT 1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the learned Tribunal was right in law while rejecting the rectification application filed by the assessee under section 254(2) in the Income-tax Act, vide annexure A-6 ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, was justi-fied in invoking the provisions of section 145(1) of the Income-tax Act against the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, accordingly, proceeded to make estimate of sales at Rs. 35 lakhs as against sales shown at Rs. 33,89,397. The Assessing Officer applied the GP rate of 8.5 per cent. as against 6.99 per cent. declared by the assessee, considering the GP rate declared by the assessee during previous years. The Assessing Officer made certain additions. On appeal, the assessee has been given partial relief. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not justified. In other words, no attempt is made on behalf of the Revenue to rely on the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 145 of the Act, the only argument being based on the applicability of sub-section (2) of section 145. In such a situation, no occasion arises for deciding the justification of the applicability of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 145 and the only question is whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee were not complete or correct, is shown to be perverse. The judgment relied upon also does not help the assessee, as therein also, the assessment was not interfered with even after holding that the proviso to section 145(1) of the Act was not attracted. 6. The question raised cannot, thus, be held to be substantial question of law. 7. The appeal is dismissed. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
