Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. In this regard, the ld. AR submitted that difference in the profit % existed only in the case of NP % and not in case of GP % and the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act did not consider the NP rate which is evident from the fact that certain indirect expenses have also been disallowed by the Assessing Officer. It was accordingly submitted that the AO rejected the books of accounts u/s 145(3) and made trading additions of Rs. 3 lacs and as far as the discrepancy in NP rate, the same was not found relevant by the Assessing Officer. It was accordingly submitted that even if there is difference in the figures of NP rate in the reply submitted during assessment proceedings vis-à-vis the Audit Report, the same is not relevant. Regarding the fact that the trading addition made by AO are not in consonance with increase in turnover for current year, it was submitted that increase in the turnover may result in increase in GP in absolute terms however, the same may not be true in % terms. On the contrary, it happens that with the increase in turnover, it results in decrease in GP %, due to decrease in the margins, in order to achieve higher turnover. It was submitted that reason for decrease in the GP% was duly conveyed to the AO and he accordingly made estimation on the basis of past history of the assessee. It was further submitted that under the scheme of the Income Tax Act, no authority which is superior to the AO can prevail over his mind. If based on the judgment of the AO, certain additions were made by him, they cannot Rameshwar Prasad Sharma Contractor, Bharatpur Vs. PCIT, Circle- Alwar be challenged by any superior authority. This is specifically applicable to a case wherein by way of his own judgment, the AO made addition on estimation basis which cannot be doubted or found to be erroneous, in the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act.