Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (5) TMI 888

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der dated 21.3.2013. While framing the assessment, the assessing officer observed that assessee is manufacturing and trading in absorbent cotton and gauge and also trading in medicines. Turnover during the year is Rs. 7,04,16,818/-. It was further observed that sales during the year was Rs. 7,04,16,818/- and profit before tax was declared at Rs. 17,22,229/-. However, turnover in the immediate previous financial year was Rs. 6,96,06,648/- and profit before tax was declared at Rs. 18,13,435/-. The A.O. noticed that there was increase in salary expenses by 268% as compared to the last year. On the contrary, the turnover has increased marginally to 6.96%. The A.O. rejecting the explanation offered by the assessee estimated gross profit and mad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue by giving finding on fact as under: "5.1 As stated in the assessment order A.O. noticed that salary expenses had gone up by 268% as compared to last year while turn over showed only marginal increase from Rs. 6.96 Crores to Rs. 7.04 Crores. A.O. also took an adverse view on excessive salary paid to family members of director. From the material placed on record it is seen that salary has been paid to 7 persons out of which 4 persons are newly employed during the year. The 3 persons to whom salary was being paid last year also are Shri S.B. Jajoo in whose case salary has been increased by Rs. 5,000/- per month. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is seen that salary is paid to Shri V.S. Gaud at the rate of Rs. 12000/- per month as Accounts Officer and to Shri Sanjay Dixit at the rate of Rs. 10000/- per month as Accountant. As against this salary at the rate of Rs. 25000/- per month has been paid to Smt. Richa Jajoo and Smt. Divya Jajoo employed as office in charge and factory supervisor. No special qualification/experience of Smt. Richa Jajoo and Smt. Divya Jajoo have been placed on record to justify the higher salary paid to them except stating that being family members they were responsible for overall administration etc. and were more trustworthy and dependable. It is seen that, even Smt. Santosh Jajoo was being paid salary of Rs. 15000/- per month from A.Y. 2007-08 before her ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....authorities below. We find that the A.O. in para-5 of the assessment order has made addition merely on estimate basis. The A.O. has not given any reasoning as to why the expenditure is being disallowed. Therefore, we do not see any infirmity into the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is affirmed. Ground raised in this appeal is dismissed. 12. Ground No.3 of the revenue's appeal reads as under: "3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by deleting the addition of Rs. 93,35,000/- made by the A.O. on account of suppression of sales by ignoring the finding of the A.O." 13. Ld. D.R. supported the order of the A.O. and submitted that the A.O. has thoroughly examined the facts and hence t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut that for the year under consideration the trading goods were different from the trading goods in the pr5eceding year and hence the gross profit percentages were not comparable. Appellant also filed complete details of the goods traded, both purchase and sale, in support of the claim of gross profit. From the submission it is seen that gross profit for the year is 10.60% as against 23.60% shown by the appellant in the preceding year. The turnover for the year has increased to Rs. 86.65 Lacs as against Rs. 32.84 lacs last year. In view of the above and the fact no defects have been pointed out in the books account and the books of accounts are duly audited the addition of Rs. 93.35 lacs cannot be sustained in appeal. This ground of the a....