9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by an order dated 31st May, 2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), Bench D, New Delhi in ITA No. 950/Del/2005 for the relevant Assessment Year 2001-02. 2 . There are four questions that have been urged by learned counsel for the Assessee. 3. The first question pertains to a gift of Rs.2 lakhs stated to have been made by one Shri Rajesh Gulati to the Assessee on 24th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the material on record by the Tribunal is a possible view to take. Therefore, we find that there is no reason to interfere in this matter since no substantial question of law arises. 6. Learned counsel for the Assessee has relied upon the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Murlidhar Lahorimal v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2006] 280 ITR (Guj) to contend that the Tribunal has proceede ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uced any books of accounts or stock register etc. before the Assessing Officer. It is too late in the day for the counsel for the Assessee to assert that the books of account were in fact furnished when the record shows to the contrary. In any event, no such plea was taken before the Tribunal. The submissions made by learned counsel for the Assessee that there was a fall in the rate of gross of pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rading activities of the Assessee had declined, we do not think the said judgment would be applicable. It is essentially a question of fact as to what gross profit rate should be applied. No hard and fast rule can be laid down in this regard. We find no error having been committed by the Tribunal in regard to the rate of gross profit. 10. The third and fourth issues raised by learned counsel f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
