UJALA DYEING & PRINTING MILLS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), SURAT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee provided justifiable reasons for the decline in GP, and the CIT(A)'s restriction of the addition was correct. Regarding depreciation, the Tribunal followed the Gujarat High Court's decision allowing set-off against survey income, thus allowing the assessee's appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee declared a lower Gross Profit (GP) percentage in the assessment year 2009-10 compared to the preceding year. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition on account of low GP, which was restricted by the CIT(A). The assessee also claimed depreciation against income disclosed during a survey, which the AO disallowed.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's explanation for a lower GP was acceptable, and whether depreciation could be set off against income disclosed during a survey.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT136 citing247 ITR 290 · 2001 · HC · Read judgment
- DCIT v. Radhe Developers India Ltd.51 citing329 ITR 1 · 2010 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT– BENCH ‘SURAT
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
ITA No.17/Ahd/2015 is directed at the instance of Revenue against order of ld.CIT(A)-II, Surat dated 13.10.2014 passed for the Asstt.Year 2009-10. On receipt of notice in Revenue’s appeal, the assessee has filed CO bearing No.29/Ahd/2015. ITA No.2274/Ahd/2016 is directed at the ITA No.17/Ahd/2015 With CO and ITA No.2274/Ahd/2016 2 instance of assessee against order of ld.CIT(A)-II, Surat dated 12.6.2016 passed for the Asstt.Year 2009-10. This
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 133A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ranchhodbhai Kurjibhai Kakadiya, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 553/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Amr Infrastructures, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle-2(1), HyderabadITA 818/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Vikaskumar Macwan, Nadiad vs Dc/ACIT Central Circle 3, VadodaraITA 2022/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026