2006 (12) TMI 83

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 09 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 14-12-2006 - JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by MARKANDEY KATJU, J. Leave granted. 2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated August 25, 2004 in Income Tax Appeal No.80 of 2004. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. The facts of the case are in a short .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessee at 13.49 per cent during the assessment year is not a match to the result declared by the itself in the previous assessment years. 6. M/s. Gem Plaza, engaged in local sales of similar goods declared voluntarily rate of 35 per cent. in its assessment for the assessment year 1997098. 7. M/s. Dhadda Exports, another assessee dealing in same items, but doing export business declared GP r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s) upheld most of the findings of the Assessing Officer, but reduced the Gross Profit from 40 per cent. to 35 per cent. 8. In further appeal, the Tribunal had given further relief to the assessee and reduced the Gross Profit rate to 30 per cent. 9. The counsel for the assessee has submitted before us that the Income-tax Authorities wrongly held that appellant has shown bogus purchases, and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X