9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 649X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he suppressed sale was not the contention urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. We find that the entire issue which arises in the present appeal is a matter of factual finding. The view taken by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal is a possible view. The Revenue has not been able to show that the impugned order of the Tribunal, is in any way perverse. - Decided against revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1953 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 26-10-2015 - M S Sanklecha And G S Kulkarni, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr.Suresh Kumar, Adv ORDER P.C. 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act') challenges the order dated 12 October 2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the 'Tribunal'). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reliable. Therefore, upheld the rejection under Section 145 of the Act. However, so far as the estimated sale was concerned, the CIT (Appeals) by its order dated 21 July 2004 reduced the suppressed sale from ₹ 1.78 crores to ₹ 1.50 crores. Further it held that the expenses incurred in respect of preparing food items on suppressed sale was not taken in account. Thus, he applied a net profit ratio of 3% as against 1.64% adopted by the assessee. On the above basis profits of the respondentassessee was worked out at ₹ 4,50,000/. 5. Both, the Revenue as well as the assessee being aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A) carried the matter in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order did not disturb the finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcentage of wastage allowed by the Assessing Officer was also very low; vi) The quantum of good preparation that can be sold by the restaurant against the utilization of 1 k.g. of material, as estimated by the Assessing Officer is excessive and not practicable; vii) There should be reasonable allowance for spoiled and state food items; viii) The fact that the assessee was employing 30 staff members/appetencies and the fact that they consume food in the assessee's premises is not considered; ix) The fact that the discount has been offered, though on selective basis, has not been considered; x) The amounts collected by the credit card included tips and these tips had been distributed; xi) The entire sale of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntion now raised that the entire turnover of ₹ 1.5 crores has to be considered as income as it is, without attributing any expenses to the suppressed sale was not the contention urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. We find that the entire issue which arises in the present appeal is a matter of factual finding. The view taken by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal is a possible view. The Revenue has not been able to show that the impugned order of the Tribunal, is in any way perverse. The proposed question of law as formulated does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Accordingly, we decline to entertain the proposed question of law. 8. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
