9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ought to be raised in the submissions in support of the appeal, would essentially require the Court to re-appreciate the evidentiary material - This is not permissible under the jurisdiction u/s 260A of the Act – as such no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 231 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 12-11-2014 - Hon'ble Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, CJ And Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,JJ. For the Appellant : Prateek Dawar,S.D. Singh For the Respondent : C.S.C. It,Bharat Ji Agarwal ORDER The assessee is in appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1 dated 28 July 2014. The assessment year to which the appeal relates is AY 2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... closed in the books of accounts. The assessee carries on the business of manufacturing and trading in playing cards and of printing. On 2 November 2007, a survey was conducted at the premises of the assessee under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 19612, during the course of which certain books of account and other incriminating documents were impounded. The assessee was found to be operating two sets of books of account containing the trading activities without recording them in the regular books of account. Parallel accounts were thus being maintained by the assessee. In this background, the Assessing Officer made the following observations: ...None of the amount is matching with the amount of sales as recorded in its regular boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partial relief to the assessee against which the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal has noted, at the outset, that the assessee had not raised a specific ground of appeal with regard to a particular addition but in its grounds had generally disputed the additions which were sustained by the CIT(A). These were dealt with together. The Tribunal found that during the course of the survey proceedings, no audited books of account were found or were produced before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). A print-out was taken from the computer which was considered as the regular book of accounts. This contained ledger accounts of sales with details with respect to ea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed material, but could not co-relate the entries found in the seized material with the ledger of the regular books of account. Moreover, in the written submission filed before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee himself has admitted that the sales should have been taken by the Assessing Officer at ₹ 91,39,321/- and thereafter net profit should have been worked out. Since the assessee could not place any evidence before us in support of his contention that the sales found in the seized material were duly recorded in the regular books of account, we are unable to accept his contention. The ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue in the light of assessee's contention and the seized material and regular books of account and has rightly determin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
