The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Leader Paper Processing (P) Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 12.3.2013 ITC No. 77 of 1997 The Commissioner of Income Tax ......Petitioner vs. M/s Leader Paper Processing (P) Ltd......Respondent CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTAHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: - Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner. ....... Revenue has filed the present petition under Section256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act') claimingfollowing substantial question of law as arising out of the order ofthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the 'Tribunal') dated18.2.1997 in relation to the assessment year 1987-88 forconsideration: - “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, thelearned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law inreversing the order of the learned CIT (A) who upheld theapplication of the provision of Section 145(2) and consequentaddition of Rs. 1,59,000/- as against Rs. 1,84,642/- made by theA.O? The said question is said to have arisen out of an orderpassed by the assessing officer on 30.3.1990 (Annexure P-3),applying gross profit rate of 20% on the correspondingly enhancedsales by making additions of the sum of Rs. 1,84,642/- in theTrading Account. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) on 6.11.1990 (Annexure P-4) upheld such additions. -2- However, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the 'Tribunal') in itsorder dated 18.2.1997 (Annexure P-7) found that the gross profit rate of19.72% was applied for the assessment year 1985-86 and 1986-87 as well. Itwas found that such gross profit rate applied for the year 1985-86 wasaffirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), though the appealwas pending before the Tribunal. The question whether 20% or 19.72% gross profit rate shouldbe applied, is the question of fact. Learned Tribunal has applied gross profitrate of 19.72% as such rates were applied in the earlier years of assessment.Consequently, we do not find any question of law arises forconsideration by this Court. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA)JUDGE 12.3.2013preeti (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE