Gujarat High Court High Court

Commissioner vs Unknown on 15 February, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Unknown on 15 February, 2010
Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/99/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

TAX
APPEAL No. 99 of 2009
 

=========================================================

 

COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX-III - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

HARSHAD
INDUSTRIES - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MRS
MAUNA M BHATT for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 15/02/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)

1. The
Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Ahmedabad has filed this Tax Appeal
under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year
2004-2005 for the determination and consideration of this Court.

Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts and confirming
the order passed by the CIT(A) deleting the addition made on account
of suppression of gross profit of Rs.18,07,460/- ?

2. Heard
Mr. Manish R. Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mrs. Mauna
M. Bhatt, Standing Counsel for the revenue and perused the orders
passed by the authority below. The Tribunal has held that no defects
whatsoever were found in the books of account of the assessee. The
assessee has also explained the reason for fall in gross profit. The
Tribunal has held that in absence of any defect of books of account,
assessee’s books of account cannot be rejected. Mere rejection in
gross profit by itself cannot be a reason to reject the books of
assessee. Since no defects in the books have been pointed out, the
Tribunal has confirmed the order of CIT (Appeal) deleting the
addition on account of suppression on sale and reduction in gross
profit.

3. Since,
there is a concurrent finding of fact by both the Appellate
Authorities, we are of the view that no substantial question of law
arises out of the order of the Tribunal. We, therefore, dismiss this
Tax Appeal.

(K.A.

Puj,J.) (Rajesh H. Shukla,J.)

rakesh/

   

Top