SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Mad) 445

K.GNANAPRAKASAM, R.JAYASIMHA BABU
V. Gopal – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:S. V. Subramanian, R. S. Veradarajan, Ravikumar, Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, Advocates.

Judgment :-

K. GNANAPRAKASAM, J.

The assessee is the proprietor of a tailoring establishment run under the name and style of "G. Tex Tailors" at Madurai. The order books and collections chittai for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83 were compared and the Income-tax Officer found that a portion of tailoring receipts to the extent of Rs. 1, 53, 000 and Rs. 3, 35, 377 were omitted by the assessee.

On appeal, the Commissioner reduced the tailoring receipts omitted by the assessee to Rs. 1, 25, 000 and Rs. 2, 00, 000, respectively. The assessee took up the matter to the Appellate Tribunal, where it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the actual omissions on the basis of the statements prepared by the assessee came to Rs. 1, 29, 664 and Rs. 1, 81, 806, respectively. The assessee' further claimed that deduction should have been given from these amounts towards stitching charges that might not have been received by the assessee on account of non-delivery of stitched clothes. The assessee further claimed that the normal rate of gross profit in this business is 40 per cent. and if the above omissions are added to the assessee's trading receipts, the resultant gross profit would










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top