TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 973
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... further requested Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, Advocate to appear on behalf of my firm. 3. I have been advised to file a cross objection, which should have been filed by middle of April, 2014. The delay of about 234 days has been caused due to misplacement of the postal envelop, heart attach suffered by my Chartered Accountant Sri P.M. Venkatesan due to the proposed demolition of his office by GHMC and consequent writ petition etc., to safe guard his office and my inability to precisely give the date of service of Form No.36 to be filled in the Cross Objection memo, besides frequent hospitalization of my mother who has been suffering from a fracture of the leg for the last one year". 3. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit, we condone the delay of 234 days in filing the cross objection by the assessee and take up the same for consideration along with Revenue's appeal. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee firm is engaged in the business of trading in pure gold and silver ornaments. It had filed return of income for the year under consideration admitting total income of Rs. 15,97,648. The Assessing officer from the sale bills, books of account, bills/voucher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing officer had sought this information during assessment proceedings, which could not be produced due to non availability at that time and had sought for admitting the same as additional evidence and consideration of same in deciding the appeal. The assessee also furnished a copy of the assessment order for the asst. year 2008-09 dt. 25.11.2010 u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, wherein the income returned by the assessee of Rs. 11,54,535/- was accepted by the assessing officer. As sought by the assessee, the additional evidence was admitted and. was forwarded to the assessing officer for submission of remand report. The assessing officer on examination of the graph stated that there are rate fluctuations in a day, however to ascertain the genuineness on other dates where the sale rates were reported to be constant, the AR of the assessee was asked to furnish the graphic details pertaining to the dates on 02.04.2008, 05.04.2008, 19.04.2008, 08.05.2008, 15.05.2008, 02.06.2008, 06.06.2008 and 27.06.2008. It was stated that he AR had furnished the detai ls of 02.04.2008, 15.05.2008, 2.06.2008 and 06.06.2008 only and on verification of the same, it was found that there are rate flu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 309.21 Crores under the head of trade in bullion itself, for the year under reference, on which the profit of Rs. 30,38,314/- was offered, as per the details brought on record. It was observed that during the course of the assessment proceedings, the A.O has observed that the assessee was recording the purchases as per the market rates, which were shown to be fluctuating constantly, including on the intraday basis, whereas the sales are recorded at uniform price and most of the sales are in cash. CIT(A) observed that for the said reasons and other reasons as enlisted in assessment order, such as over writing on the second copy of sales invoices and failure to furnish the rates at different times, except furnishing the graph on the rate fluctuations at international levels, the Assessing Officer had to reject the books of accounts and estimate the gross profit @ 0.50/0 on gold bullion sales of Rs. 309,21,97,256/- resulting in net addition of Rs. 1,24,22,672/- (Rs.1,54,60,986 - Rs. 30,38,314). The CIT(A) further observed that assessee's objection on the issue was that where the rate is fluctuating, the sale rate cannot be stable or uniform, for which the assessee was relying ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pted by the A.O. Accordingly, the A.O is directed to re-compute the total income of the assessee by adopting the gross profit on bullion trade receipts of Rs. 309.21 Crores at 0.200/0, which may meet the justice at both the ends. Thus, this ground of appeal is treated as Partly Allowed." 7. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us raising following the grounds of appeal: "1. The ld. CIT(A) is not correct in fact and in law in reducing the margin of estimated profit in situation when the books of account of the assessee/firm have been rejected. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in fact and in law in reducing the profit margins without any comparable cases in the same line of trade." 8. Assessee also filed C.O. against the order of CIT(A) raising the following cross objections: "1. The order of the CIT(A) in so far as it is against the interest of the respondent/assessee, is against law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. 2. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that no specific defects in the accounts of the assessee were pointed out by the Assessing Officer except by way of generalisation and consequently erred in making an e....