TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remises and, therefore, could not be produced and AO applied GP rate of 12.8% and made addition - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- It is true that at the assessment stage the assessee did not produce books of account and related documents/ evidences but it is equally true that before the first appellate authorities the assessee submitted all the evidences alongwith books of account. It is an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-5, New Delhi dated 29.07.2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2010-11. 2. The grievance of the revenue read as under:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6,86,84,246/-. 2. That on the facts and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he turnover of Rs. 4438110526/-. The AO further noticed that in the immediately preceding year the assessee has shown GP rate of 12.8% against the turnover of Rs. 5155725007/-. The assessee was asked to justify the fall in the GP rate by giving item wise purchase detail of raw-material and selling price of finished goods alongwith justification of increase in the manufacturing expenses. Since the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of vouchers, copy of invoices and other documents/ evidences in respect of claim of expenditure. 7. After considering the submissions and the remand report and after the verification of book of accounts by the AO the CIT(A) deleted the additions made on account of low GP rate. In so far as disallowance of miscellaneous and other expenditure of Rs. 7 lacs is concerned the CIT(A) on facts restric ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gwith bills and vouchers but also accepted the same. On these facts we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). The ground No.1 is dismissed. 11. In so far as ground No.2 is concerned we find that the CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance considering the facts of the case to Rs. 3,50,000/- which calls for no interference. 12. In the result, the appeal of the reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
