M/s. Industrial Security Services,, Surat v. The ACIT.,Circle-7,, Surat

ITA 3926/AHD/2007 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 392620514 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AAKFM1044N
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 3926/AHD/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Industrial Security Services,, Surat
Respondent The ACIT.,Circle-7,, Surat
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 22-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 12-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 12-01-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 23-10-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.C.AGRAWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF HEARING : 12/01/2010 DRAFTED ON: 12 /01/2010 ITA NO.3926/AHD/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES 1 ST FLOOR UPPER TOWER VAISHALI CINEMA ROAD SURAT VS. THE ASST.CIT CIRCLE-7 SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : AAKFM 1044 N (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI J.P. SHAH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI B.S. GEHLOT CIT-D.R. O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(APPEALS)-V SURAT DATED 14/08/2007 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: (1) THE CIT(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED THE APP EAL IN TOTO KEEPING IN MIND THE OVERALL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 2 - (2) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACT I N REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT UND ER SEC.145 OF THE ACT. (3) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) FURTHER ERRED IN LAW AND I N FACT IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.42 28 443/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED LOW NET PROFIT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND VERY CAREFULL Y GONE THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CAS E ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING SECURITY SERVI CES. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT OF RS.14 83 635/- AT THE RATE OF 0 .85% ON THE TURNOVER OF RS.17 36 68 915/- AS COMPARED TO NET PROFIT OF RS.7 1 30 820/- AT THE RATE OF 5% ON THE TURNOVER OF RS.14 21 41 479/- IN THE I MMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. THUS ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED TH AT THERE IS A FALL IN THE NET PROFIT SHOWN IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION BY 4.15%. SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE SEEKING EXPLANATI ON FOR FALL IN THE NET PROFIT. IT WAS FOUND BY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT SE CURITY CHARGES HAVE BEEN DECREASED FROM 92.78% SHOWN IN THE LAST YEAR TO 91. 5% DURING THE YEAR. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCREASED FROM 5.98% TO 8.62% OF THE TURNOVER. THE ASSESSEE EXPL AINED THAT IN THE ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 3 - PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ASSESSEE HAD MAD E A DISCLOSURE OF RS.60 LACS SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD OTHER INCOME. I F OUT OF TOTAL PROFIT OF RS.71 30 820/- THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.60 LAC S IS TAKEN OUT THE PROFIT WOULD COME DOWN TO RS.11 30 820/- WHICH IS 0 .80% OF THIS SECURITY INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THEREFORE EXPLAINED THAT THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE ROSE TO 5% IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSM ENT YEAR BECAUSE OF RS.60 LACS WAS SURRENDERED AS ADDITIONAL INCOME. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALWAYS REMAINED BETWEEN 0.75% TO 1% OF THIS SECURITY INCOME. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THA T IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 & 2002-03 THE NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS 0.95% AND 1% RESPECTIVELY IN THE ABOVE YEAR. AS R EGARDS COMPARABLE CASES CITED BY ASSESSING OFFICER IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT IN THE CASES OF THE COMPARABLE CASES THE TURNOVER IS MUCH LOWER COMPAR ED TO THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THEREFORE EXPLAINED THAT N ET PROFIT WILL ALWAYS BE LOWER IF THE TURNOVER OF THE UNIT IS TOO HIGH BECA USE THE EXPENSES OF THE UNIT ALSO WILL REMAIN VERY HIGH. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HOWEVER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOTED THA T THE PROFIT RATE COULD NOT BE IGNORED MERELY BECAUSE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID LIABILITIES ON DIWAL I BONUS AND INCENTIVES ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 4 - AS WELL AS UNPAID LEAVE WAGES ARE NOT PROVED AND N OTED THAT REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND THAT BOOK RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIABLE TO BE REJECTED U/S.145 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 BECAUSE THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES COULD NOT BE PROVED SATISFACTORILY AND ARE NOT SUBJECTED TO VERIFICATION. BOOK RESULTS WERE ACCORDINGLY REJECT ED U/S.145 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.20 08 297/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID INCENTIVES AND ALSO MADE ADDITIO N OF RS.10 65 600/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID LEAVE WAGES. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE ADDITIONS MADE ABOVE AND CONSID ERING THE RECTIFICATION ORDER PASSED U/S.154 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 ENHANCE D THE GROSS PROFIT RATE OF THE ASSESSEE TO 3.5% AS AGAINST SHOWN BY THE ASS ESSEE AT 0.85%. THE ADDITION OF RS.42 28 443/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF L OW NET PROFIT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ABOVE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID INCENTIVES AND ON ACCOUNT OF LEAVE WAGES ADDITIONS ARE COVERED UNDER THE ABOVE ADDITI ON MADE ON ACCOUNT OF NET PROFIT RATE. 3. THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS BEFORE T HE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) WHILE CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS. 42 28 443/- ON ACCOUNT OF NET PROFIT. IT WAS BRIEFLY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LEARNED ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 5 - CIT(APPEALS) THAT PROFIT IS TO BE ASCERTAINED WITH REFERENCE TO THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THAT BOOK RESULTS IN THIS CA SE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN REJECTED. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) BECAUSE OF THE SEPARATE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID LIABILITY/INCENTIVES/ LEAVE WAGES. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) NOTED THAT BOOK RESULTS HAVE B EEN CORRECTLY REJECTED IN THE MATTER. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ALSO CONF IRMED THE ADDITION ON MERIT BY REJECTING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 4. BEFORE US THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REIT ERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AS WERE MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMI TTED THAT NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR ENHAN CED BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL INCOME SURRENDERED IN A SUM OF RS.60 LAC S. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT OTHERWISE NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE IS CONSIS TENT AS COMPARED TO NET PROFIT DECLARED IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS I N QUESTION. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APP RECIATED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE. HE HAS REFERRED TO PAPER-BOOK PAGE NOS.49 & 50 WHICH IS THE REPLY FILED BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLAIN THAT ADDITION IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 6 - ASSESSEE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION IS WIT HOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DELETED OR IN ALTERNATE CONTEN TION SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION IS EXCESSIVE AND UNREASONABLE. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMIT TED THAT EVEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER CITED COMPARABLE CASES IN WHICH T HE NET PROFIT RANGES FROM 1.64% TO 3.06% THEREFORE AUTHORITIES BELOW W ERE JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE BOOK RESULTS AND IN MAKING ADDITION O N ACCOUNT OF LOW NET PROFIT RATE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN CASE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF NET PR OFIT IS DELETED OR MODIFIED BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE A DDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNPAID INCENTIVES I N A SUM OF RS.20 08 297/- AS WELL AS AN ADDITION OF RS.10 65 6 00/- ON ACCOUNT OF LEAVE WAGES. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THESE ADDITIONS WERE NOT CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) THEREFORE IN CASE OF MODIFICATION IN THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF NET PROFIT RATE SUCH ADDITION WOULD STAND AND C OULD NOT BE SUBJECTED TO INTERFERENCE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ASSESSEE ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 7 - HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE ABOVE ADDITIONS. THE LEARNE D DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF ANY INTERF ERENCE IN THE NET PROFIT ADDITION THE ABOVE ADDITION WOULD STAND IN THE OR DER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BECAUSE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED ABOUT THESE ADDITIONS WOULD COVER UNDER THE ADDITION MADE ON TH E GROUND OF NET PROFIT PERCENTAGE. 6. IN REJOINDER THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE THE ABOVE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF LEAVE WAGES AND UNPAID INCENTIVES SEPARATELY THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CHALLENGE THE SAME EITHER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(AP PEALS) OR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND IN CASE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF NET PR OFIT IS MODIFIED THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A PPEALS) TO RE- CONSIDER THE SAME. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT T HE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF UNPAID SALARY AND WAGES UN PAID DIWALI BONUS EXPENSES AND UNPAID INCENTIVES AND UNPAID LEAVE WAG ES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERING THESE ISSUES IN THE LIGHT OF TH E TOTAL TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE EX PENSES HAVE INCREASED ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 8 - AS COMPARED TO THE SECURITY CHARGES THEREFORE SUC H AN ISSUE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH RE LEVANT MATERIAL AND FACTS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLAIN THE EXPENDITURE WHICH HAVE A DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. S INCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY SATISFACTORY RESPONSE AND EVIDENCE AND THE AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES COULD NOT BE PROVED THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREFORE MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNP AID INCENTIVES IN A SUM OF RS.20 08 297/- AND FURTHER ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LEAVE WAGES OF RS.10 65 600/-. BOTH THE ABOVE ADDITIONS WERE TREATED TO BE COVERED UNDER THE ADDITION MADE ON THE GROUND OF LO W NET PROFIT PERCENTAGE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CHALLENGE BOTH TH E ABOVE ADDITIONS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) OR BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. THEREFORE SUCH ADDITIONS HAVE REACHED FINALITY AND COULD NOT BE SU BJECTED TO INTERFERENCE BY THE TRIBUNAL MORE SPECIFIC WHEN NO SUCH GROUND OF APPEAL OR THE ARGUMENTS ARE RAISED ON THAT ACCOUNT. CONTENTION O F ASSESSEE THAT IT MAY BE REFERRED TO LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IN CASE OF MODI FICATION ON ADDITION O9N MERITS IS THEREFORE REJECTED. 8. THE ABOVE FACTS THEREFORE WOULD SHOW THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN RIGHTLY REJECTED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER U/S.145 OF THE ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 9 - I.T. ACT 1961. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT MAKE ANY ELABORATE ARGUMENT ON THE REJECTION OF THE BOOK RES ULTS AND ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOW NET PROFI T RATE IS EXCESSIVE UNREASONABLE AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS. ON CONSIDERATI ON OF ABOVE SUBMISSIONS WE MAY NOTE THAT ASSESSEE IN THE ASSES SMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT OF 0.85% ON THE TURNOVE R OF RS.17 36 68 915/-. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003- 04 HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT RATE OF 5.01% ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL INCOME SURRENDERED IN A SUM OF RS.60 LACS. IF THE ADDITIO NAL INCOME NOTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY IS EXCLUDED THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER BOOKS WOULD COME DOWN TO RS.11 30 820/- WHICH WOULD BE A T 0.80% OF THE SECURITY INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE OTH ER PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 AND 2003-03 ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT RATE OF 0.95% AND 1.00% RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS ALSO NOTED COMPARABLE CASES IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HOW EVER IN THOSE CASES THE TURNOVER OF THE COMPARABLE CASES ARE MUCH LOWER AS COMPARED TO THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE. THE HON'BLE RAJASTHAN HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOTAN LIME KHANIJ UDHYOG 256 ITR 243 (RAJ .) HELD THAT ON MERE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT U/S.145(3) OF TH E I.T. ACT 1961 DOES NOT MEAN ADDITION IS NECESSARILY TO BE MADE. THE P RIVY COUNCIL IN THE ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 10 - CASE OF CIT VS. LAXMINARAIN BADRAIDAS 05 ITR 1 70 HELD THAT ESTIMATE OF PROFIT SHOULD BE FAIR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER S HOULD NOT ACT DISHONESTLY OR VINDICTIVELY OR CAPRICIOUSLY. OWN KNOWLEDGE P REVIOUS HISTORY LOCAL KNOWLEDGE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE C ONSIDERED TO ARRIVE AT FAIR AND PROPER ESTIMATE OF INCOME. THE HON'BLE S UPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF DHAKESHWARI COTTON MILLS 26 ITR 775( SC) HELD THAT IN MAKING THE ASSESSMENT U/S.23(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 THE ITO IS NOT FETTERED BY TECHNICAL RULES OF EVIDENCE AND PLEADINGS AND HE IS ENTITLED TO ACT ON MATERIAL WHICH MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED AS EVIDENCE IN A COURT OF LAW BUT THE ITO IS NOT ENTITLED TO MAKE A PURE GUESS WORK AND M AKE AN ASSESSMENT WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ANY EVIDENCE OR ANY MATERIAL A T ALL. THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING MORE ABOVE MERE SUSPICION TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 9. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE NOTED ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE BOOK RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE NET PROFIT WAS COMPARED WITH THE P RECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER FORG OT TO NOTE THAT THE NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR INCREASED BECAUSE OF ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.60 LACS WAS SURRENDERED WHICH WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. HOWEVER IN THE ASSES SMENT YEAR UNDER ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 11 - APPEAL NO SUCH MATERIAL WAS FOUND AGAINST THE ASSE SSEE AND EVEN NO SURVEY IS CONDUCTED. IN THE OTHER PRECEDING ASSESS MENT YEARS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN NET PROFIT RATE OF 0.95% AND 1% RESPECTIVELY AND IN CASE ADDITIONAL INCOME IS EXCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR THE NET PROFIT RATE OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE 0.80% O F THE SECURITY INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME FROM PROVIDING SECURITY SERVICES. THEREFORE SECURITY INCOME IS TO BE COMPARED WITH THE EARLIER YEAR. IN CASE IN NET PROFIT RATE IS COMPARED WITH THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS AS NOTED ABOVE EXCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN A SUM OF RS.60 LACS THERE IS NO FALL IN NET PROFIT RATE AS NOTED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS ALSO NOTED ABOVE THAT TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE IS MUCH MORE HI GHER THAN COMPARED WITH THE COMPARABLE CASES NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR THEREFORE PROFIT MARGIN COULD NOT BE SAME. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER AND CONSIDERING THE PREVIOUS HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE WE DO NOT FIND IT A FIT CASE FOR ENHANCING THE NET PROFIT RATE IN THE MATTER. EVEN IF BOOK RESULTS ARE REJECTED U/S.145(3) OF THE I.T. AC T 1961 THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS.42 28 443/- ON ACCOUNT OF NET PROFIT RATE IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED UNREASONABLE AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS. W E ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS ISSUE A ND DELETE THE ADDITION OF ITA NO .3926/AHD/2007 INDUSTRIAL SECURITY SERVICES VS. ASST.CIT ASST.YEAR 2004-05 - 12 - RS.42 28 443/- SINCE THIS ADDITION IS DELETED TH EREFORE THE SEPARATE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT O F UNPAID INCENTIVE AND LEAVE WAGES WOULD STAND IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BECAUSE THEY WERE COVERED BY THE AFORESAID ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF NP RATE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 10. WITH THE ABOVE FINDING AND OBSERVATION THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER SIGNED DATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22 /01 /2010 SD/- SD/- ( D.C. AGRAWAL ) ( BHAV NESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 22 / 01 /2010 T.C. NAIR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. TH E RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED. 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-V SURAT 5. THE DR AHMEDABAD BENCH. 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT AHMEDABAD