1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2981 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-Central 18. ...Appellant. Vs. Ashok L.Shah. ...Respondent. ..... Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr.K.Gopal with Mr.Jitendra Singh for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. 16th February, 2010. P.C. : The question which is raised by the Revenue in the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is whether the Tribunal has correctly confirmed the order of the CIT (Appeals) who had directed a deletion made on account of gross profit in the amount of Rs.56,84.360/-. The Assessing Officer rejected the books of account of the assessee and recomputed the rate of gross profit at 30% instead of 23.69% for Assessment Year 2002-03. In appeal, the CIT (Appeals) held that there was hardly any justification for the Assessing Officer to reject the books of 2 accounts and that the assessee has successfully explained the reason for a reduction in the net profit. Moreover, the books of accounts were properly audited and sales and purchases have been properly accounted for. The CIT (Appeals) held that the Assessing Officer has not found any specific instance of an act of commission/omission on the part of the assessee. Hence, the enhancement of the declared rate of gross profit from 23.69% to 30% was held to be incorrect and the corresponding addition of Rs. 56,54,566/- was deleted. The Tribunal has noted the explanation submitted by the assessee before the CIT (Appeals). The Tribunal held that there was no concrete basis for rejecting the books of accounts unless specific material was brought on the record to show that the books were not complete or correct. In these circumstances, on the basis of the material on record, the Tribunal has confirmed the deletion made by the CIT (Appeals). The appeal, in these circumstances, raises no substantial question of law and is accordingly dismissed. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)