ORDER M. SALEEM SHAD QURESHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER. -First two cross appeals one by the department and the other by the assessee have been filed pertaining to Assessment Year 1989-90. Whereas the 3rd appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 1990-91 has been filed by the assessee-appellant only. Since all the three appeals involved similar type of facts and issues, we, therefore, propose to dispose of all these appeals under consideration through one combined order.
2. Department as well as the assessee-appellant has come into appeal against the order of the learned CIT(A), Lahore vide his A.O. Nos. 204 & 239, dated 13.10.1991 pertaining to Assessment Year 1989-90 and 1990-91.
3. We have heard both the parties and gone through the orders of the authorities below and also considered all the grounds of the appeals pertaining to Assessment Years under consideration, in the Assessm ent Year 1989-90, departmental objection is that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in reducing the and-backs made under the heads conveyance from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.25,000/- and petrol from Rs.10,000/'- to Rs.4,000/- and entertainment from Rs.3,000/- to R.2,000/- being unvouched and unverifiable. Whereas on the other hand the assessee-appellant has agitated that G.P. Rate of 19% as against declared G.P. Rate of 15% to be excessive. Whereas in the Assessment Year 1990-91 only the assessee-appellant has come forward to agitate the G.P. Rate of 19%% as against declared rate of 14.98% to be excessive.
4. Considering all the aspects of the case and going through the orders of the authorities below, we are of the opinion that the order of the learned CIT(A) is quite reasonable and comprehensive in the given circumstances of the case. The learned CIT(A) has thoroughly considered the issues of application of G.P. Rate and also the fixation of and-backs. The finding of the learned CIT(A) is quite reasonable and proper which calls for interference on our behalf. We, therefore, do not feel inclined to comment on the well-founded verdict of the learned CIT(A). Both the cross-appeals one by the department and the other by the assessee-appellant pertaining to Assessment Year 1989-90 and the 3rd appeal filed by the assessee- appellant pertaining to Assessment Year 1990-91 are hereby dismissed accordingly.