9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 737X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the order of the CIT(A), Bhatinda dated 23-2-1995. The only ground raised in this appeal reads as under :- "That the ld. CIT(A) has erred on law and facts in confirming addition of Rs. 30,637 on account of difference in entries on books of account, the same be deleted." 2. In this case, there was a search operation under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 the business premise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. 3. The learned CIT(A) observed that the entries on the pages available in seized record are very specific and definite. He, therefore, confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below. He vehemently argued that the amount reflected in the seized document was only estimate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was submitted that the Assessing Officer never doubted the payments made by the assessee to M/s. Rajan Agency. 5. As regards to the calculation on the pad, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the same were estimated only and actually correct figures have arrived at, at the time of purchase of rice bran. 6. In his rival submissions the learned D.R. supported the orders of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irming the action of the Assessing Officer for making the addition on the basis of rough estimate on a letter pad found at the time of search, when the bills for authenticated purchases were also available with him. It is also noticed that in the present case, the Assessing Officer has not rejected the book results while applying the provisions of section 145(1) of the Act. In that view of the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
