Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
Decided on : Aug-27-1997
Reported in : (1998)65ITD188(Chennai)
..... have not been obtained from the bank/banks for cross verification. (v) the directions regarding the verification of the fixed deposits of rs. 1.72 crore vis-a-vis the corresponding entries in other bank accounts have not been carried out. (vi) details of immovable properties and their correct valuation have not been collected and examined as directed. 4. in view ..... has been passed by the assessing officer without application of mind as he has taken into consideration irrelevant factors not germane to computation of undisclosed income as provided in section 158b of the act. the assessment, therefore, impugned in the present appeal is illegal and requires to be quashed, submits assessee's counsel. elaborating further, the assessee's counsel submitted that the ..... 3 per cent. of the turnover. he claimed that the margin of profit in respect of similar dealers in karnataka and andhra would be the same. however, details of the comparative data was not furnished by him. the total turnover during the block period is roughly rs. 31 crores. the net profit on this turnover at the admitted rate of 3 ..... basis of details available regarding the investments made by the assessee and the expenditure incurred by him during the block period. (ii) the assessing officer should collect details regarding the comparative figures in the case of a similar trader viz., karnataka agro corn products, bangalore, who earlier supplied the product to the government of tamil nadu, who is assessed by company .....Tag this Judgment!