Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4.2.8 It is seen that the turnover of the appellant is Rs. 32,66,42,54,999/- for AY 2013-14, Rs. 33,03,05,43,784/- for AY 2012-13 and Rs. 24,03,14,31,074/- in AY 2011-12, which decrease in turnover. The G.P. has increased from 0.11% in AY 2012-13 to 0.13% in AY 2013-14.

4.2.9 The appellant had produced the stock register for verification during the assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any instance of sales been made at a rate below the prevailing market rate. The Hon'ble ITAT has clearly held in the case of M/s MCS Trading Co. (P) Ltd. that if the sales is not found to have been made at the rate below than the market rate, any allegation regarding manipulation in the cash memos cannot be accepted. Further, the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s MCS Trading Co. P Ltd. has deleted the estimation of G.P. for AY 2010-11 in the absence of any incriminating material. In the appellant's case, the Hon'ble ITAT has upheld the addition on account of G.P. rate for AY 2010-11 only due to the fact that there was sharp fall in the G.P. compared to the preceding year. In the period under consideration despite decrease in turnover, the G.P. has increased compared to the preceding year.

4.2.8 It is seen that the turnover of the appellant is Rs. 17,54,26,56,728/- for AY 2014-15, Rs. 32,66,42,54,999/- for AY 2013-14, Rs. 33,03,05,43,784/- for AY 2012-13 and Rs. 24,03,14,31,074/- in AY 2011-12, which decrease in turnover. The G.P. has increased from 0.13% in AY 2013-14 to 0.26% in AY 2014-15.

4.2.9 and 4.2.10: XXX (identical to AY 2013-14 re-produced above)"

9. During hearing before us, Ld. DR for revenue strongly supported AO's order. He submitted that the CIT(A) has wrongly followed the orders of earlier year of ITAT in assessee's own case and in the case of M/s MCS Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. for granting relief to assessee without taking care that in earlier years, there was a consideration of search u/s 132 conducted by department. He submitted that search-case has involvement of incriminating material found by authorities and therefore a different kind of reasoning. But present years under consideration are materially different since there is no involvement of any search. He emphasized revenue's grounds that the CIT(A) has not given any contrary finding against AO; the CIT(A) has deleted additions ignoring the findings made by AO for rejection of books; and that the CIT(A) has erred in giving decision on the basis of ITAT's order in earlier year although that order has not been accepted by department and the department filed next appeal to High Court.