I.T.A. NO-251/K]3 OF 1999-2000 Versus I.T.A. NO-251/K]3 OF 1999-2000

ORDER

The Department in- this appeal has objected to the order of the learned A.A.C., dated 21-8-1999 reducing the application of N.P. rate at 5% as against 9.32 % declared by the assessee and 15 % G. P. rate applied by the Department.

2. Mr. Shoukat Soomro, learned representative of the appellant Department has contended that the original assessment was completed under Self-Assessment Scheme as the assessee has the history of Self-Assessment. Later on it came to the knowledge of the Department that assessee has deposited the amount to the tune of Rs.9.,88,598 during the year under consideration in his account in U.B.L. So, the case was reopened under section 65 of the Ordinance and as there was clear concealment of income, therefore, Assessing Officer determined the total income as under:---

Entire amount of deposits of

Rs. 9,88,598 treated as sales rounded to

Rs. 10,00,000

G. P. @ 15% =

Rs. 1,50;000

Less expenses claimed at at Rs.14,200 but allowed

Rs.12,000

Total Income

1,38,000

3. On the other hand, Mr. Abdul Tahir, I.T.P., learned representative of the assessee has contended that the assessee explained the Assessing Officer about the said amount deposited in the account and a certificate of Mr. Abdul Rehman, Contractor Railway N.T. No. 8-13-1900184 was submitted who has confirmed that he has purchased electric goods from the assessee amounting to Rs.7,00,000 and trading account of the same amount was filed showing sales of Rs.7,00,000 and commission @ 1-1/2% coming to Rs.10,500 but due to the expenses of salary of Rs.7,200 travelling expenses of Rs.2,000 and miscellaneous expenses of Rs.1,300, there was Nil income and it was, therefore, not declared. But the Assessing Officer did not accept the version of the assessee. According to learned A.R., the learned A.A.C. should have to accept the declared version but he has also reduced the net profits rate to 5 % and the assessee having its business at Sukkur could not file the appeal against that order. He has, therefore, requested to dismiss of appeal of the department.

4. I have heard both the learned representatives and have also perused the impugned order and the assessment order. I have observed that the learned A.A.C. has given sufficient cause for reducing the N.P. rate to 5%. I, therefore, find no warrant for interference in the impugned order and the appeal of the department is dismissed.

C.M.A./M.A.K./9/Tax(Trib.) Appeal dismissed.