I.T.A. NO. 2628/LB OF 1992-93 Versus I.T.A. NO. 2628/LB OF 1992-93

ORDER

1. In this appeal relating to Assessment Year 1991-92 additions in trading as well as P&L account are being contested. At the time of hearing of appeal objection in respect of addition in the trading account only was pressed claiming that estimate of receipts at Rs.11,00,000 was excessive in view of the power units consumed as well as history of the case.

2. Appellant is a Registered Firm derived income from repair of crank shafts'. For the year under appeal, repair receipts declared at Rs.10,48,940 were estimated at Rs.12,25,000 which were reduced by CIT(A) to Rs.11,00,000. Appellant's Authorized Representative contended that the declared receipts for this year were quite reasonable and compared favourably with the preceding years and, therefore, ought to have been accepted. It was contended that power consumption was a fair indicator of the volume of business in any year. It was pointed out that appellant had compared the figures of power consumption and declared receipts for this year as well as the earlier two years before the ITO end the CIT (Appeals) but both of them had failed to rebut appellant's contention regarding reasonableness of the declared receipts and had proceeded with their estimates. The position of repair receipts viz-a-viz power consumption during the three years was shown to be as under:---

ASSTT

YEAR

2. Power Consumption

3. Receipts

4. Declared

5. Assessed

6. Fixed in Appeal

7. 1989-90

8. 17880 Units

9. Rs.10,71,167

10. Rs.12,50,000

11. Rs.11,00,000

12. 1990-91

13. 16650 =

14. Rs.10,00,316

15. Rs.12,00,000

16. Rs.10,50,000

17. 1991-92

18. 16376 =

19. Rs.10,48,940

20. Rs.12,25,000

21. Rs11,00,000

22. (Under Appeal)

23. The above chart clearly brings out the fact that receipts declared for the year under appeal were quite reasonable. Considering the past history and circumstances of the case, the receipts ought to have been accepted. The assessing officer would modify the assessment accordingly.

3. The appeal succeeds as above.

24. C.M.S./379/Trtb. Appeal allowed.