Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-Ii v. M/S. Choice Fashion (P) Ltd., Jaipur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.287 of 2010. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-IIVERSUSM/s. Choice Fashion (P) Ltd., Jaipur Date of Order :::: 22.11.2010 Hon'ble The Acting Chief Justice Mr. Arun Mishra Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh Mr. R.B. Mathur, counsel for the appellant **** By the Court: Instant appeal has been preferred aggrieved by the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench`A' Jaipur (for short, hereinafter to be referred as 'ITAT') in ITANo.16/JP/2010 for the assessment year 2006-07 on18.06.2010. The Assessing Officer had adjudged the gross profitrate as 19.44%. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)reduced it to 18%. On further appeal being preferred before theITAT by the assessee, the ITAT upon due consideration of thefacts and circumstances enumerated in paragraph-7 of the orderhas deemed it appropriate to assess the gross profit rate as16.67% for the year in question. Aggrieved by the order, instantappeal has been preferred. ITA No.287 of 2010. Shri R.B. Mathur learned counsel appearing on behalfof the Revenue has submitted that the order passed by theCommissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) was an appropriate one. TheCommissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) has taken into considerationall the relevant aspects and had come to the conclusion that grossprofit rate was in fact 18%. Thus, the finding recorded by the CIT(A) based on sound reasonings could not have been interfered withwithin the legal parameters by the ITAT. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for theRevenue and going through the orders available on record, we findthat the ITAT has recorded a finding of fact in the instant case dulyconsidering the various aspects of the matter and gross profit ratesdeclared by the assessee in earlier years has also been taken intoconsideration. It has also clear that regular banks of account whichconsists of cash book, ledger, voucher of purchase, sales andexpenses have been maintained regularly by the assessee. Thebooks of account are also audited. The auditors have not made anyadverse remarks on the maintenance of books of accounts neitherany unaccounted purchase or sale has been detected by the A.O.and entire turnover is fully vouched. It is also a fact that entire saleis of export. Merely, non-maintenance of stock register or production of the stock register could not be said to be vital in the facts andcircumstances of the case. Considering the nature of business, theITAT has also in the instant case held that rejection of books ofaccount was not justified. It has also been found that there wassufficient increase in the turnover of the assessee which was justdouble than the preceding year. Net profit rate for both the yearshas also been taken into consideration. It has also found that therewas an increase in the costs of raw materials and this fact has alsobeen admitted by the A.O. It has also been found that there wasan increase in the cost of stitching charges. Considering the overall circumstances, the tribunal has given a finding to apply g.p. rateof 16.67%. The said finding is purely based on facts and byforming a different on such facts is not sufficient to interfere inappeal. Finding cannot be said to be perverse. No substantialquestion of law arises in the instant appeal. Consequently, the appeal being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed and the same is, hereby, dismissedsummarily as the finding cannot be said to be perverse which callsfor any interference. (Dalip Singh) J. (Arun Mishra) Actg. C.J.