9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned therefrom. The addition made by the Assessing Officer were based upon reasonable grounds, which may not be said to be arbitrary. In fact, the Tribunal was indulgent to the appellant in reducing the average rate to Rs.8000/- per surgery. Appellant has further argued that a specific ground was raised before the Tribunal that the rejection of books of accounts is wholly unjustified and that the Tribunal has wrongly recorded in the order that the rejections of books of account was not disputed by the assessee. Thus no merit in the said argument as well. Mere fact that in the grounds of appeal, the appellant has raised a ground to assert that rejection of books of account is incorrect, is not sufficient to accept the argument of the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The said order was affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Patiala vide order dated 13.12.2010 (Annexure A-20). However, in appeal, the learned Tribunal reduced the quantum of addition @ Rs.8000/- per surgery. The learned Tribunal recorded the following findings:- During the appellate proceedings wherein numerous opportunities were allowed to the assessee to present his case vis-a-vis addition made by the Assessing Officer after rejecting the books of account. The assessee is not in appeal (amended grounds of appeal) against the rejection of books of account and objection raised is against the addition made on account of unaccounted surgeries. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs.25,13,016/- on account of 247 su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bay High Court reported as C.I.T vs. Dr. M.K.E. Memon, (2001) 248 ITR 310 wherein it has been held that the Assessing Officer cannot estimate the undisclosed income on arbitrarily basis. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and find that the substantial question of law framed does not arise for consideration. The Tribunal in its order has mentioned that the appellant has admitted 247 undisclosed surgeries. The statement of the assessee was that Rs.6000 per surgery should be applied to determine the undisclosed income, whereas the Tribunal has reduced the rate of addition @ Rs.10,147/- applied by the Assessing Officer to Rs.8000/- per surgery. We find that once the assessee has himself stated before the Tribunal that the ave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
