K.k.denesan v. Ramkumar, Jj

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 ITA.No. 36 of 2009() --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22/08/2008 IN IT(S&S)A NO. 85/COCH/2005 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE ---------------------------------------------------- MRS.U.V. ZUHARA, PROPRIETOR PALAKKI MEDICALS, MANZOOR HOSPITAL BUILDINGS, KANHANGAD. BY ADV. MR.V.P.MOHANDAS MR.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: --------------------------------------------------------- THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CNETRAL CIRCLE, CALICUT. BY ADV. MR.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I.T.A. NO: 36 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23[rd] March, 2009. JUDGMENT RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. Even though various questions are raised in the appeal filedby the assessee, we notice that the only issue pertains toestimation of percentage of gross profit for determining the incomefor the relevant year. The assessee has no dispute with regard tothe unaccounted turnover estimated during the block periodpursuant to search. Even though assessee offered undisclosedincome at 10% the assessing officer noticed that percentage ofgross profit for the earlier years was much higher. The assessingofficer therefore adopted the gross profit at the same percentagereturned by the assessee in the previous years and completed theassessment. This is confirmed by the first appellate authority aswell as by the Tribunal. We do not find any substantial question oflaw arising from the order of the Tribunal because there is nodispute with regard to the unaccounted turnover determined by theassessing officer based on information gathered on search. So faras the rate of gross profit is concerned, the authorities have only I.T.A.No: 36/2009 adopted the same rate of profit declared by the assessee for theearlier years. We therefore dismiss the appeal. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge K. SURENDRA MOHANJudge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: