9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 722X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sales in the instant case and to pass orders accordingly. This ground of appeal is allowed. - ITA Nos. 630 & 631/Ahd/2018 - - - Dated:- 17-3-2021 - SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R. Respondent by : Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders both dated 18.04.2016 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad arising out of the orders both dated 01.04.2015 passed by the Ld. DCIT, Sabarkantha Circle, Himatnagar under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively. Since both the appeals relate to the same assessee and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntinuation of business and shifting of papers/documents the appellant had not been able to find out the copy of the order dated 18.04.2016 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) which was received by the department on 01.03.2018. Apart from that a memo dated 10.06.2013 issued by the Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited (UGVCL) was filed whereby and whereunder the power supply of the appellant company had been permanently discontinued as per the request of termination made by the appellant on 21.05.2013. It appears that power supply agreement executed by and between the appellant and the government company stood terminated w.e.f. 01.08.2013 as available at Page 2 of such reply filed by the appellant. Furthermore, the auditors note specifically mentioning tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipts of ₹ 1,64,39,660/-. Subsequently it was brought to the notice of AO that the G. P. rate for the year has mistakenly taken at 40% instead of 27.86% as declared in the audit report by the appellant. The order under Section 154 was, therefore, passed by the Ld. AO revising the G. P. rate @ 27.86% as declared by the assessee. Appeal was preferred by the assessee against the said order before the First Appellant Authority on the ground that in assessee s own case the Hon ble Tribunal in ITA Nos. 788 789/Ahd/2013 for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07 has been pleased to adopt the G. P. rate @ 20% on the suppressed sales. In that view of the matter according to the appellant the G. P. rate ought to have been applied @ 20% in the case in hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to be computed by applying net profit rate of 19.51% of A.Y. 05-06 and 15.51% for A.Y. 06-07 for which reliance was placed on the decision in the case of President Ind. 258 ITR 654 (Guj) and Tribunal decision in the case of Vrundvan Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Gokul Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT. We find that the facts in the case of President Ind. (supra) were different than that in the case of Assessee as in that case, based on the survey and examination of excise records, unrecorded sales were found. In that case there was no finding with respect to unrecorded expenses. We therefore feel that the ratio of the decision in the case of President Ind. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of present case. With respect to the other decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unaccountable sales in the instant case and to pass orders accordingly. This ground of appeal is allowed. 7. The appellant does not wish to proceed with the Ground No. 2. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 8. In the result, assessee s appeal is partly allowed. ITA No. 631/Ahd/2018 (A.Y. 2008-09):- 9. These ground of appeals are identical to that of the issues already been dealt with by us in ITA No.630/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2007-08 and in the absence of any changed circumstances the same shall apply mutatis mutandis. Hence, this appeal preferred by the assessee is also partly allowed. 10. In the combined result, both appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 17/03/2021. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
