TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (2) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s as under: "1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,15,000/- made on account of low GP rate without considering the fact that the assessee was carrying out business outside the books of accounts and hence avoided various statutory taxes resulting in the higher GP." 3. The learned DR relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that the assessee was carrying out business outside its books of accounts and hence has avoided payment of various statutory taxes which resulted in higher rate of GP and therefore the GP addition made was justified. He referred to relevant portion of the assessment order in support of the case of the Revenue. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the GP a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order of the CIT(A) is confirmed and the Ground No.1 of the Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 6. The Ground No.2 of the Revenue's appeal reads as under: "2. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.52,54,143/- made on account of unexplained investment in sales outside the books of accounts at Rs.4 crores, without appreciating the fact that there were clearcut admission on the part of the assessee for unaccounted sales recorded in the register seized as Annexure A-13 and also no evidence was filed by the assessee regarding parties on whose behalf so called job work as claimed was carried out." 7. The learned DR submitted that the assessee has shown total sale of Rs.7.09 crores during the year and has show....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for carrying out unaccounted turnover. The case law relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee is in favour of the assessee. In these circumstances, we hold that there was no mistake in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition and accordingly the order of the CIT(A) is confirmed and the Ground No.2 of the Revenue is dismissed. 10. CO No.302/Ahd/2007 in ITA No.3000/Ahd/2007 : A.Y.2004- 2005 (Assessee's CO) 11. The grounds raised in the appeal are as under: "1. Without prejudice, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in not giving any finding on the first ground of the assessee that the order passed by the DCIT u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3) is bad in law and hence deserves to be cancelle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of search. While deleting the said addition, the ld.CIT(A) has ignored the facts brought on record particularly that when there was no dispute regarding discrepancy in the stock found and recorded in the books of accounts, there has to be production and sales to the extent of shortage of raw materials, out side the books of accounts." 17. The learned DR submitted that the addition was made on account of sales outside the books of accounts produced out of shortage of raw material found during the course of search. He submitted that there is no mistake or discrepancy in the books of accounts and therefore there has to be some production and sales to the extent of shortage of raw materials outside the books of accounts of the assessee. He ....