M/S. SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD, JAIPUR v. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

ITA 445/JPR/2018 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 44523114 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AALCS4308P
Bench Jaipur
Appeal Number ITA 445/JPR/2018
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 7 month(s)
Appellant M/S. SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD, JAIPUR
Respondent INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 04-11-2019
Last Hearing Date 11-06-2018
First Hearing Date 11-06-2018
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 04-04-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH A JAIPUR BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN JM & SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV AM ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR CUKE VS. INCOME- TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2) JAIPUR PAN/GIR NO.: AALCS4308P APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJNIKANT (CA) & SHRI S. R. SHARMA (CA) REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH (JCIT) DATE OF HEARING : 03/10/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04/11/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-2 UDAIPUR DATED 18.01.2018 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS T AKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN LAW IN CON FIRMING REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 145(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 ON THE GROUND THAT PURCHASE TO T HE EXTENT OF RS. 1 83 68 232/- ARE ALLEGEDLY NOT GENUINE AND NOT VER IFIABLE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) IS FURTHER WRONG AND HAS ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMING ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 45 92 058/- BEING 15% OF ALLEGED UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES REFERRED TO IN GROUND NO. (1 ) ABOVE. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN TRADING (EXPORT & DOMESTIC) OF SEMI-PRECIOUS STONES AND SILVER JEWELLERY. NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 22 .03.2016 AND IN RESPONSE ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 2 THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.0 4.2016 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 16 50 850/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPL ETED U/S 143(3) READ WITH 147 AT AN ASSESSED INCOME OF RS. 62 42 900/-. AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE BOGUS PURCHASES AMOU NTING TO RS. 1 83 68 232/- FROM FIVE CONCERNS WHICH ARE CONT ROLLED AND OPERATED BY RAJENDRA JAIN GROUP IN RESPECT OF WHICH SEARCH OPER ATIONS WERE CARRIED OUT ON 03.10.2013 AND STATEMENT OF THE KEY PERSON OF THE G ROUP HAS BEEN RECORDED AND IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THESE CONCERNS WER E INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND NOT DOING ANY GENUINE BUS INESS ACTIVITIES. THE AO THEREAFTER ENHANCED THE TRADING PROFITS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE BY AMOUNT OF RS. 49 92 058/- WHICH WAS COMPUTED @ 25% OF THE TOT AL UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASE AMOUNTING TO RS. 1 83 68 232/-. ON APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE REJECTION OF BOOK OF ACCOUNTS BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEV ER THE ADDITION WAS REDUCED TO 15% OF THE UNVERIFIABLE PURCHASES. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A). 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. AR SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY SUBMITTED COMPLETE DETAILS OF PURCHASES FRO M THE FIVE CONCERNS IN TERMS OF PURCHASE INVOICES VAT REGISTRATION PAN N UMBER CONFIRMATION OF THE PARTY FROM WHOM THE PURCHASES WERE MADE AND THE FAC T THAT THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE WHICH STOOD DEBITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IT WAS FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ENQUIRIES AND INVESTIGATION WHICH HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ST ATEMENT MADE ON BEHALF OF THE SAID CONCERNS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON AS THE SAID STATEMENT NOWHERE MENTION THE NAME THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS-EXAMINATIO N OF THE PERSON WHOSE STATEMENTS WERE RECORDED AND RELYING ON THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN CASE OF ANDAMAN TIMBERS IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 3 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUN ITY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION WHICH IS A NULLITY IN THE EYES OF LAW AND THEREFORE THE SAME SHOULD BE QUASHED. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS NOT DISBELIEVED THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BUT ONLY DISBELIEVED THE PURCHASE VOUCHERS. THE TRADING ACCOUNT AS SUCH HAS NOT BEEN DISTURBED AS OPENING STOCK CLOSING STOCK AND SALES AS DECLARED HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ONLY DOUBTED THE SELLERS FROM WHOM THE PURCHASES HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. RELIANCE WAS PLA CED ON THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION IN CASE OF CIT VS. SATH YA NARAYAN P. RATHI (2013) 351 ITR 350 AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT BOOKS OF ACCO UNT PRODUCED CLEARLY INDICATE THE PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SUBSEQUENTLY USE D IN MANUFACTURING OF GOODS WHICH WERE SOLD AND EXPORTED OUT OF INDIA WHI CH COULD NOT BE IF THERE ARE NO PURCHASES AND SO THE RATIO OF ABOVE JUDGMENT IS FULLY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF APPELLANT. FURTHER RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN CASE OF BHURAMAL RAJ MAL SURANA VS. DCI T IN ITA NO. 4091/JP/2012 DATED 15.12.2012 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES ON THE GROUND THAT THE SUPPLIERS WERE FOUND TO BE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDERS AND REJECTED THE BOOK RESULTS U/S 145(3) OF THE ACT THEN THE AO AFTER REJECTION OF T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT CAN PROCEED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF BEST JUDGMENT INSTEAD OF RESORTING TO MAKING THE ADDITION TO THE BOOK RESULT S. SIMILARLY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN CASE OF ACIT VS. M/S ALLIED GEMS CORPORATI ON (794/JP/11 795/JP/2011 AND 716/JP/2012 DATED 15.12.2017 HAS HE LD THAT WHERE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REJECTED THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO THE AVERAGE G.P RATE BASED ON THE PAST HISTORY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED THE GP RATE OF 11.41% ON THE TOTAL SALES OF RS. 4 55 26 235/- AND BEING THE FIRST YEAR OPERATIONS THERE IS NO PREVIOUS HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE COMPARABLE CASE OF M/S KEDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. WHICH IS ENGAGED IN TRADING (EXPORT & DOMESTIC) IN ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 4 SEMI-PRECIOUS STONES AND SILVER JEWELLERY AND WHICH HAS DECLARED GP RATE OF 10.04% FOR A.Y 2009-10 MAY BE CONSIDERED. IT WAS A CCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE GP RATE SO DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BETTER T HAN THE COMPARABLE GP RATE DISCLOSED BY M/S KEDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. AND EVEN WHERE THE BOOK OF ACCOUNTS ARE REJECTED U/S 145(3) NO ADDITIONS SHOULD BE MAD E IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. PER CONTRA LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS RELIED ON TH E FINDING OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IT IS A CLEAR CA SE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WHICH HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AS CLEAR FR OM THE REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATION WING AND THE LD CIT(A) HAS ALREADY RE DUCED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF 15% OF THE PURCHASES AND THE SAME SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IT IS A CASE WHERE THE AO B ASED ON INVESTIGATION CARRIED OUT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN CASE OF RAJENDRA JAIN GROUP HAS COME TO BE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN ACCOMMODATI ON ENTRY OF BOGUS PURCHASES FROM FIVE CONCERNS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 83 68 232/- AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN REJECTED U/S 145(3) AND THE AD DITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE EXTENT OF 25% OF THE UNVERIFIABLE BOGUS PURCHAS ES WHICH HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED TO 15% BY THE LD. CIT(A). NO SPECIFIC A RGUMENTS HAVE BEEN TAKEN AGAINST THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS U/S 145( 3) AND HENCE THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND RESULTS SO DECLARED THEREI N IS CONFIRMED. GIVEN THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REJECTED THE ASSES SING OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF BEST JUDGMENT I NSTEAD OF RESORTING TO MAKING THE ADDITION TO THE BOOK RESULTS. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER WHILE EXERCISING HIS JURISDICTION CANNOT ACT ARBITRARILY OR CAPRICIO USLY. THE ASSESSMENT MUST PROCEED ON JUDICIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN LIGHT OF RELE VANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN OTHER WORDS IN ANY CASE OF BEST JUDGME NT THOUGH THE ELEMENT OF ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 5 GUESS WORK IS INVOLVED HOWEVER THE GUESS WORK SHOU LD HAVE NEXUS WITH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DISCRETION MUST NOT BE EXERC ISED ARBITRARILY OR CAPRICIOUSLY. FOR THE PURPOSES OF MAKING THE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN HELD AS RELIABLE A ND REASONABLE BASIS FOR ESTIMATION OF PROFITS. ALTERNATIVELY COMPARABLE C ASES IN THE SIMILAR LINE OF BUSINESS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. IN THE INSTANT CASE BEING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATIONS PAST HISTORY IS NOT RELEVANT AND HENCE CONSIDERING THE COMPARABLE CASE OF M/S KEDIA EXPORTS PVT. LTD. WHICH HAS DECL ARED THE GP RATE OF 10.04% AS AGAINST 11.41% DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT NO ADDITION SHOULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 7. FURTHER THE DECISION IN CASE OF ACIT VS. M/S AL LIED GEMS CORPORATION (SUPRA) WHEREIN SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH SUPPORTS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE: 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3). THE ISSUE OF REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS IS INVO LVED IN THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE WE DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE WHILE DECIDING THE CROSS OBJECTION. ONCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE REJECTED BY THE AO THE ONLY COURSE OF ACTION LEFT TO THE AO IS TO ASSESS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF BEST JUDGMEN T AND GP RATE IS CONSIDERED AS PROPER AND REASONABLE BASIS AND GUIDANCE FOR THE BEST JUDGMENT . ONCE THE BOOKS RESULT ARE REJECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT PROCEED TO MAKE AN ADDITIO N TO THE INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AS PER BOOKS RESULT. HOWEVER THE AO IN THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF APPLYING THE GP RATE MADE ON ADDITION@ 25% OF THE PURCHASES TO THE BOOK RESULTS. THIS ACT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ITSELF CONTRADICTS THE DECISION OF REJECTING THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNTS AND BOOKS RESULT. THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 -07 HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE AND UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 2.20 AND 2.30 A S UNDER:- 2.20 HENCE THERE ARE CERTAIN CONCERNS FOR WHICH R EVENUE GOT EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF STATEMENT RECORDED IN RESPECT OF SUCH PARTIES OPEN ING BALANCE IS RS. 37 06 175/- WHILE THE ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 6 CLOSING BALANCE IS RS. 42 81 496/-. IT MEANS THAT T HERE IS AN ACCRETION OF AMOUNT OF RS. 5.75/- LACS. IT MEANS THAT TO THIS EXTENT ACCRETION ITA N O.794& 795/JP/11 716/JP/12 CO 76& 77/JP/11 60/JP/12 ACIT VS. M/S ALLIED GEMS CORPORA TION 8 IN PURCHASE IS WITHOUT SUPPORTING THE CORRECT BILLS. OF COURSE TOTAL OPENTING BALANC E OF ALL PARTIES IS RS. 1 15 43 782/- AND THE CLOSING BALANCE IS RS. 1 33 36 193/-. HOWEVER LOOK ING TO THE ACCRETION IN THE CLOSING BALANCE OF THE CONCERNS FOR WHICH REVENUE HAS MATERIAL THE AD DITION CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS REASONABLE 2.30 THE HONBLE P & H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF UPLAKESH METAL INDUSTRIAL V CIT 177 TAXMAN 298 HELD THAT ISSUE DECIDED BY THIS IS IN THE REALM OF APPRECIATION EVIDENCE. THE FIND OF TRIBUNAL AS MENTIONED IN THIS JUDGMENT IS A S UNDER:- 'HOWEVER IN OUR OPINION THE OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASS ESSEE WAS PRIMA FACIE REQUIRED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS IS NOT MISPLACED BECAUSE THERE IS NO DISTINCTION LAID BETWEEN THE TRADE CREDITOR AND THE NON-TRADE CREDITOR AND WE ARE FURTHER OF THE OPINION THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS LIABIL ITY OF PAYMENT TO THE TRADE CREDITORS SHOWN IN THE BALANCE-SHEET THE ASSESSEE IS DEFINITELY RE QUIRED TO PRIMA FACIE PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE TRADE CREDITORS AS WELL AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE T RANSACTION. IN THIS CASE ADMITTEDLY THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER BEEN ABLE TO DISCLOSE THE COMP LETE ADDRESSES OF THE TRADE CREDITORS NOR IS ABLE TO GIVE THE COMPLETE ADDRESSES OF THE CONSIGN ORS NOR THE NAME HAS BEEN MENTIONED ON THE CHALLAN FORMS SO THE VERIFICATION OF THE SAME BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BECAME TOTALLY IMPRACTICABLE ON ACCOUNT OF LACK OF THIS COMPLETE I NFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT MEANS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED IN ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE SO CALLED TRADE CREDITORS APPEARING IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. WE ARE FURTHER O F THE OPINION THAT SINCE IN THE INSTANT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE POINT UNDER CONSIDERATION BEFO RE US IS REGARDING THE GENUINENESS OF THE LIABILITY AMOUNTING TO RS. 1 75 26 586/- SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BALANCE-SHEET AS TRADE CREDITORS SO IT WAS NOT RELEVANT FOR US TO CONSI DER AS TO WHETHER THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE GENUINE OR NOT OR TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS INFLATED THOSE PURCHASES OR NOT. IT IS ALSO NOT MATERIAL TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE GRS FROM SALE-TAX DEPARTMENT WERE VERIFIED OR NOT SO THE CIT(A) ON CONSIDERING THES E POINTS WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WITHOUT DISCUSSING AS TO WHETHER THE LIABILITY OF TRADE CREDITORS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ABSENCE OF FURNISHING COMPLET E ADDRESSES OF TRADE CREDITORS /CONSIGNORS AND THE PAYMENT VOUCHERS WAS GENUINE OR NOT.' WHILE EVALUATING THE MATERIAL COLLECTED BY THE REVENUE ON THE TOUCH STONE ON HUMAN PRO BABILITY AND CONSIDERING THE ACCRETION IN THE CLOSING BALANCE IN RESPECT OF PARTIE S FOR WHICH REVENUE HAS MATERIAL IN THE FOR M ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 7 OF STATEMENT. WE FELL THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS REAS ONABLE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5.00 LACS. HENCE BOTH THE GROUNDS OF ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. WE FURTHER NOTED THAT WHEN THE CORRESPONDING SALE IS NOT IN DISPUTE THEN THE QUESTION IS ONLY REGARDING THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF PURCHASES AND VERIFICATION OF THE SAME. THE LD. DR HAS RELIED UPON THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HOW EVER WE FIND THAT IN ALL THOSE DECISIONS THERE WAS A FINDING OF FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE INFL ATED THE PURCHASES UPTO 25% AND THEREFORE IT WAS NOT A CASE OF NON VERIFICATION OF THE PURCHASE AND REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BUT THE FACT WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE INVESTIGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE INFLATED THE PURCHASE PRICE AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION OF 25% BEING INFLATED PURC HASES WAS MADE AND UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS AGAIN UPHELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. O N THE CONTRARY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE AO NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING OF INFLATED PURCHASES BY THE ASSESSEE BUT DOUBTED THE VERY TRANSACTION OF PURCHASES DUE TO NON PRODUCTION OF T HESE PARTIES BEFORE THE AO. THE AO HAS NOT GIVEN THE FINDING THAT THE PRICES OF THE GOODS WAS INFLATED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT THE AO DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE PURCHASES ON THE GROUND THAT THE SUPPLIERS WERE FOUND TO BE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDERS. WHEN THE AO REJECT ED THE BOOK RESULTS U/S 145(3) OF THE ACT THEN THE AO AFTER REJECTION OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT CAN PROCEED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF BEST JUDGMENT INSTEAD OF RESORTING MAKE TH E ADDITION TO THE BOOK RESULTS. ACCORDINGLY IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN V IEW OF THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2006-07 WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO THE AVERA GE GP RATE BASED ON THE PAST HISTORY. HENCE THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUE APPEALS ARE REJEC TED BEING WITHOUT ANY SUBSTANCE OR MERITS. IN THE RESULT THE ADDITIONS SO MADE AND SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/11/2019. SD/- SD/- ( SANDEEP GOSAIN ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 04/11/2019 ITA NO. 445/JP/2018 M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD. JAIPUR VS. ITO JAIPUR 8 * GANESH KR. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- M/S SUNNY GEMS INDIA PVT. LTD JAIPU R 2. THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO WARD-5(2) JAIPUR 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITAT JAIPUR. 6. GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 445/JP/2018} BY ORDER ASST.REGISTRAR