Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2.1. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri V.S. Jadhav, defended the addition of the impugned amount by contending that for A.Y. 2009-10, the gross profit was 32.06%, whereas, for the current assessment year, the assessee showed the G.P. at 28.98% against which the ld. Assessing Officer estimated the G.P. at 30%. The crux of the argument by the ld. DR is in support to the addition.

Mandakini Fashions 2.2. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee firm is manufacturer and exporter of readymade garments, fabrics and local sales. The assessee declared income of Rs.2,13,190/- in its return filed on 13/10/2010. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny, therefore, through notices, the assessee was asked to furnish the details. The assessee responded to the notices and filed the details for verification. Copy of audited account, profit & loss account and balance sheet was also furnished by the assessee as is evident from page-1 of the assessment order itself. The assessee declared total turnover of Rs.5,69,89,515/- resulting into gross profit of Rs.1,65,13,566/-. The assessee was asked to explain the reason of low G.P. as in A.Y. 2009-10, the gross profit was shown at Rs.32.06%. The assessee explained that the decrease was due to increase in the turnover. However, the ld. Assessing Officer estimated the gross profit at 30% which resulted into addition of Rs.5,81,293/-. On appeal, before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the addition was confirmed. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.