9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year. The S.Y. 2037, relevant to the asst. yr. 1982-83, which is under consideration, ended on 30th June, 1981. At the assessment proceedings the ITO noted that the assessee firm had done the job work exclusively for its sister concern M/s K.J. Vakhariia but in doing that the assessee firm had charged less amounts than what would have been chargeable by it for such work. The ITO deal with the point in paragraph 13 and 14 of his order in the following manner: "13. Now presuming that there was no nexus between M/s K.J. Vakharia and M/s Vakharia Traders as discussed at length above, the normal charges for comparable quality prints (M/s K.J. Vakharia has got a good name in the market thus it is presumed that reasonably good quality of colour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TO, as reproduced above, and contended that it was a clear case of diversion of income on the part of M/s K.J. Vakharia, aforementioned, and understatement of profits by the assessee-firm. We, however, do not agree with this approach of the learned D.R. 2.3. It is not disputed that the assessee firm has done the job work exclusively for its sister concern M/sK.J.Vakharia. It could also not be disputed before us that the GP returned on the total receipts were certainly higher than that of the immediately proceeding year, as has been found by the learned CIT(A). It could also not be disputed before us that not only in the immediately preceding year but also in the subsequent assessment years no addition of the nature as had been now made b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceipts and all the expenses that the learned CIT(A) had thought it proper to delete the addition. It could not be disputed before us that the assessee firm had placed all the relevant details of the expenditure in question before the ITO. In our opinion, the finding recorded by the CIT(A) on this point is also sustainable. We, therefore, dismiss this ground too. 4. C.O. of the assessee (C.O. No. 34/88): The assessee is in cross-objection against the addition of Rs. 5,000 being alleged sale of empty containers of colour chemicals. It could not be satisfactorily explained before us as to what the assessee does with the empties of the colour containers. Looking to the total turnover of the assessee and the quantity of consumption of colour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
