TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cy commission is not pressed. The same is accordingly, rejected. 3. The next dispute is with regard to confirming the disallowance of Rs. 66,190 on account of vehicle expenses and Rs. 66,440 on account of vehicle depreciation. These disallowances were made by the AO on account of personal use by the directors and their family members The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. This issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron Engg. Co. vs. CIT (2002) 172 CTR (Guj) 339 : (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj) wherein it is held that in case of a private limited company there cannot be any personal use by the directors in respect of vehicles. Respectfully following the aforesaid decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance of Rs. 17,625." Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, we reverse the orders of the authorities below and delete the disallowance of Rs. 27,707. 6. The last dispute in the assessee's appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs. 15,423 on account of recalculation of quantum of deduction under s. 80-IA treating it for non-business purposes. The assessee claimed deduction under s. 80-IA at 30 per cent on Baroda unit amounting to Rs. 6,77,700. The AO noted that the said amount also included interest income earned by the assessee on account of fixed assets, deposits with various banks and agency income which were not related to activities of industrial undertaking and not eligible for deduction under s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration as well. 8. Now, we take up the Revenue's appeal. The only dispute involved in the Revenue's appeal is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 24,70,133 made by the AO on account of GP. The assessee declared a GP rate of 43.74 per cent in the year under consideration as compared to 48.88 per cent in the immediately preceding year. The reason for the fall in the GP was given by the assessee as hike in the cost of raw material and stiff competition in the market. The sales of the assessee were to Government and public sector undertakings and there was considerable increase in the exports where the margin of profit was lower. Having been dissatisfied with the explanation of the assessee, the AO, adopted the GP of 48.88 per cent as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered their rival submissions. The AO has not pointed out any specific defects in the maintenance of books of account, in the absence whereof book results cannot be rejected. The observation of the AO that GP in exports is always higher as compared to raw material sales is not well founded. The AO has not been able to establish that the assessee has made purchase at higher cost from the group concerns or made sales to them at lower prices. Rejection of book results only on the ground of fluctuation in GP is not tenable. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 24,70,133. We uphold his order on this issue. 11. The cross-objection filed by the assessee is only in support o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
