9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t once the addition has been made by increasing the gross profit rate then there is no further scope of making separate addition under different heads. A similar view has also been taken by in the case of CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar [1997 (5) TMI 37 - ALLAHABAD High Court] wherein it was held that when income of the assessee was computed by applying the gross profit rate, there was no need to look into the provision of section 40A(3) of the Act. Thus CIT (A) has rightly deleted separate addition made by AO of ₹ 21,59,700 under section 40A(3) - ITA No.829/JP/2012 - - - Dated:- 23-1-2013 - Order The order of the Bench was delivered by B. R. Mittal (Judicial Member).-The Department has filed this appeal for the assessment ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so made and confirmed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts of the case, kindly be deleted in full. (4) The cross-objector prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the cross-objection before the date of hearing." At the time of hearing, the learned authorised representative for the assessee submitted that the grounds of the cross-objection taken by the assessee are withdrawn. In view of the above submissions of the learned authorised representative, the grounds of the cross-objection are dismissed. In respect of ground of appeal taken by the Department, the relevant facts are that the assessee derives income from newspape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this appeal by the Department. At the time of hearing, the learned Departmental representative supported the order of the Assessing Officer. The learned Departmental representative also referred to the decision of the hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Hynoup Food and Oil Ind. P. Ltd. [2007] 290 ITR 702 (Guj) and submitted that if the payments are made in cash exceeding the prescribed limit, disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act is justified. On the other hand, the learned authorised representative supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in deleting said addition of Rs. 21,59,700 as the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has upheld the action of the Assessing Officer to rej ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shown in the books of account as "market outstanding". The hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. P. Pravin and Co. [2005] 274 ITR 534 (Guj) has held that once the addition has been made by increasing the gross profit rate then there is no further scope of making separate addition under different heads. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in the case of Choudhary Bros in I. T. A. No. 1177/JP/2010 vide order dated May 31, 2010 has also taken a view that composite addition by way of application of gross profit rate and net profit rate would be sufficient to take care of such discrepancies. A similar view has also been taken by the hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar [1998] 229 ITR 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
