TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (2) TMI 196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich it was computed last year on which basis the decision of the Tribunal was given, and on that basis it worked out to only 10.95%. The ITO gave detailed reasons why gross profit rate should work out at higher percentage this year even after taking into account the Tribunal's decision for the asst. yr. 1977-78 and he applied a gross profit rate at 16.5% which resulted in trading addition of Rs. 50,689. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) took the view that gross profit rate at only 14% should be applied. He, accordingly reduced the gross profit addition to only Rs. 14,643 which is challenged in this appeal before us. After examining the material on record and taking into account the defects noticed by the authorities below in the books of account of the assessee, we are of the opinion that the gross profit rate at 14% applied by the CIT(A) on the basis of the decision of the Tribunal last year is reasonable and requires no interference. This objection of the assessee is, therefore, rejected. 3. The next objection of the assessee is regarding an addition of Rs. 39,299 for alleged closing stock. The assessee firm had suppression of following three partners: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding addition before the CIT(A) stood at Rs. 40,689 it was prayed that the addition of Rs. 39,299 should be deleted. The learned CIT(A) did not accept the arguments of the assessee and in addition to the reasons given by the ITO in his order, gave seven more reasons why he considered that the register and the loose papers belonged to the assessee firm. Those reasons, inter alia, included the fact that M/s Moolchand Pukhraj & Co. had been shown as a debtor in the Trial Balance found in those books and hence they could not belong to M/s Moolchand Pukhraj & Co. Similarly he pointed out that M/s Mayur Textiles had been shown as a debtor with an amount of Rs. 54,860 and hence it could not belong to M/s Mayur Textiles also. It has also been mentioned that the names of all the partners of the appellant firm find place in the trial balance of those books and papers. He, therefore, confirmed the view taken by the ITO that the books belonged to the assessee firm although discovered at the premises of M/s Moolchand Pukhraj & Co. He further held that the assessee had suppressed closing stock by an amount of Rs. 39,299 and hence confirmed the addition. 5. It has been vehemently argued before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of closing stock at Rs. 1,09,000 could have been done merely on estimate basis. He relied on the orders of the authorities below who had given detailed reasons for coming to the conclusion that these books and loose papers belonged to the assessee firm and hence submitted that the additions made should be sustained. 7. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced from both the sides and have also perused the orders of authorities below and material on record. We are, however, of the opinion that the decision of the authorities below in this regard is correct and that has to be upheld. A large number of items that tally between the regular books of account and the books so discovered, the name of the assessee given on the first page of the relevant register can leave no doubt that the books belonged to the assessee. More so when the assessee has been shifting its stand and has not come out with clean hands. Hence, taking into account these facts and the facts as discussed in detail by the ITO and the learned CIT(A) in their orders, we uphold their view that these books belonged to the assessee. Similarly, after taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edits represent income, it is income from a source which has already been taxed. In the case of Tyaryamal Balchand decided by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, the Hon'ble Court had taken note of the fact that intangible additions of substantial amounts had been made in the case of that assessee even in earlier years and had claimed that the impugned cash credits should be taken as having come out of such intangible additions. That assessee had also admitted before the first Appellate Authority that unaccounted trading receipts were temporarily credited in the books. Their Lordships thereafter referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. vs. CIT where their Lordships of the Supreme Court had observed that it is a matter for consideration in each case whether the unexplained cash deficits and the cash credits can be reasonably attributed to a pre-existing fund of concealed profits or they are reasonably explained by reference to concealed income earned in that very year. In fact the ratio of the entire decision so also the decisions cited in that judgment is to the effect that if the assessee admits having concealed its earlier....