D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. B.t. Suitings (P) Ltd
High Court
14 Aug 2006 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · rhcjodh240618
Parties
D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. B.t. Suitings (P) Ltd
Date of order
14 Aug 2006
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. M/S. B.t. Suitings (P) Ltd, the High Court (2006) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed in limine.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.70/2006(CIT, Ajmer Vs. M/s. B.T. Suitings (P) Ltd.)
Date of order : 14.8.2006
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BALIAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS
Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the appellant.
Having heard learned counsel for theappellant, we are satisfied that no question of lawmuch less substantial question of law arises forconsideration in this appeal under Section 260-A ofthe Income Tax Act.
The facts of the case are that assesses'sbooks of accounts were rejected on the ground that inthe current year of accounts, the assessee has shownlower GP rate. The assessing officer applied GP rateof 10% and made additions of Rs.7,30,830/-.
The assessing officer has not found anymaterial defects in the books of accounts of assesseeand particularly the sale receipts have not been foundto be erroneous and accepted by the assessing officer.Considering these facts, the CIT (A) reduced theaddition to Rs.30,830/- while resorting to bestjudgment assessment.
On further appeal by the revenue before the
arun
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the order of CIT (A)was upheld.
Making of estimation of income on availablematerial is primarily a matter of inherent guess workand is a question of fact.
We are of the opinion that the Tribunal hasrightly dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Noquestion of law has arisen for consideration in thisappeal.
The appeal is dismissed in limine.
(GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. (RAJESH BALIA), J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.