2014 (3) TMI 367

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d this order in which he ignored all genuine expenses and added in income of assessee and also erred as nature of assessee's income business. 3. That the Assessing Officer had addition as discussed in para 5 in income tax order then he has compared G.P. rate with last year wrongly calculation and assessee was filed sales, purchases month wise figure and also opening and closing stock as per audited balance sheet shown. That the addition of Rs. 2,43,569/- is in income of assessee unjust, against the law of accounting system. 4. That the Assessing Officer in para 6 in income tax order Rs. 315/- as shown head in profit & loss A/c Rs. 37,144/- bank charges and Rs. 2,96,851/- bank interest, these expenses was paid by the firm to bank of In....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....11, wherein the ld AR of the assessee attended the proceeding and filed details asked vide the questionnaire. According to the Assessing Officer for the relevant Assessment Year, the assessee has shown a net profit 1.56% as against the net profit which she yielded last year i.e. 2.76%; the assessee was asked vide order sheet entry dated 16.12.2011 to furnish the details/ confirmation, bank accounts, books of accounts, bills and vouchers in support of the secured loans, unsecured loans, sundry creditors and advances, investment made, purchases, sales and expenses claimed in the income and expenditure A/c and the matter was fixed for 21.12.2011. Since no one appeared before the Assessing Officer on that date the matter was again adjourned to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id not get sufficient time to collect and produce the necessary documents before the Assessing Officer in order to satisfy him in respect to the queries raised by him in respect to the expenses incurred by her in the course of business. Therefore, according to the ld AR, adequate opportunity and time was not granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer to clarify her stand and 30 days was too short a period to collect all documents demanded by AO and therefore could not substantiate her claims. Therefore the ld AR pleads that since there was violation of principles of natural justice, the order of the ld CIT(A) has to be struck down. On the other hand the ld DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and ld CIT(A) and took pain to ....