9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1470X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer rejected the books of account and made a lump sum addition of Rs. 2.00 lacs. The Assessing Officer also did not accept the declaration of agricultural income of Rs. 22,900/- and also made the addition. The ld. CIT(A) reduced the trading addition to Rs. 1.00 lac and also sustained the addition on account of agricultural income of Rs. 22,900/-. 3. Now the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT by taking following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts by Ld. AO by invoking provisions of section 145(3) of the income Tax Act,1961 solely for non maintenance of day to day Stock Register. Appellant prays the rejection of books may please be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d it reasonable to sustain trading addition to extent of Rs. 1,00,000/-." 5. While pleading on behalf of the assessee, the ld AR has submitted as under: That the appellant is a wholesaler of sugar and books of the accounts were duly audited and the auditors had not made any adverse remark in particular, nor have they questioned the reliability of the books of the appellant. Further in the tax audit report the auditor has duly verified the tally of goods traded. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted final quantitative tally in respect of the items, dealt with by him, giving complete quantitative details of the goods involved. The Ld.AO while rejecting the plea of the appellant has neither pointed a specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , (about 30% as compared to the previous year). Such sharp increase in turnover in the competitive market could be achieved only by incurring extra cost or by lowering the profit margin which is fundamental principal of marketing. Also that, the commodity in which the appellant deals, is a semiperishable commodity, which does not have a static demand, and thus due to its nature, has to be sold off with lesser margins, in order to abstain from being obsolete and unfit for consumption. This results in variation in the overall GP rates. Further, the Ld. AO has made adhoc addition without appreciating the quantum of turnover/ receipts achieved by the appellant and therefore results declared by the appellant deserves to be accepted. The Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly of Rs. 50,000/-. Accordingly, ground No. 1 of the appeal is dismissed and the ground No. 1.1 of the appeal is partly allowed. 8. In the ground No. 2 and 2.1 of the appeal, the issue involved is against sustaining the addition of Rs. 22,900/- under the head business income while the assessee has declared the income as agricultural income in the return of income. 9. The ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition by holding as under: "In respect of addition of Rs. 22,900/- by A.O. by treating agricultural income as business income, it is seen that the assessee has not filed any evidence of earning of agricultural income from the agricultural land. Mere filing of photocopy of Jambandi does not indicate earning of agricultural income. Therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
