Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Commissioner Of Income Tax -I vs We Have Heard Learned Counsel Shri

High Court Of Gujarat|23 May, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) For the Assessment Year 2004-05, the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad [ Tribunal for short] dated 23rd May 2012 is challenged in this Tax Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 { Act for short}, raising following questions of law for our consideration :-
{A} Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has justified by deletion made in respect to GP while there were various discrepancies in books ? .
{B} Whether the tribunal under the facts and circumstances of the law, was right in deleting the addition of Rs.3,24,70,328/- on account of excise duty, on opening stock material provided u/s.145A of the Act ? .
We have heard learned counsel Shri Sudhir Mehta for the Revenue and Shri R.K Patel for the assessee-respondent, on caveat.
The first question concerns deletion made in respect of gross profit. It appears that for different assessment years, the Assessing Officer had estimated different gross profits. The Tribunal, on having quoted extensively the CIT [A] findings, noted that for the AY 2004-05, the gross profit was better than the immediate preceding year and there was no specific expenses and purchases which were found under-vouched. On having been satisfied with the existence of parties and payments, which were made through cheques, it concurred with the findings of the CIT [A] on the ground that non-maintenance of the quantitative record was not the ground for rejecting the books of account, when the gross profit was higher in the immediately preceding year.
Firstly, there is sufficient discussion on the subject which both the authorities have done; and secondly, the issue is predominantly based on factual aspect. With no perversity having been noted in such findings, it gives no rise to any question of law.
The second question, only on the ground of smallness of the amount ie., Rs. 970/=, is not being considered. Question, therefore, for this assessment year is not being considered.
Tax Appeal is dismissed.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (Ms. SONIA GOKANI, J.) Prakash* Page 3 of 3
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Commissioner Of Income Tax -I vs We Have Heard Learned Counsel Shri

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
23 May, 2012