2015 (2) TMI 1174 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of low GP - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - We find that the CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned speaking order on this issue. It is undisputed fact that the assessee has started new proprietary concern by the name Rakesh Fashion to deal in low- end sari, and there was no business in this concern in the earlier year. Also there was a stock transfer of ₹ 22.39 lakhs in respect of dead stock from old concern to the new concern. The fall in GP was marginal and no specific defect could be pointed by the AO in the account books of the assessee. In these facts, we are of the view that the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition on account of low GP - Decided against revenue Undisclosed bank accounts transactions - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - The admitted fact is that the two bank accounts of the assessee with Axis Bank and ICICI Bank Ltd. were not disclosed to the department. However, the legal position on this issue is well settled that only the peak amount in such type of case could be added as income in the hands of the assessee and not aggregate of the total credit side of the account. In this case, the CIT(A) has recorded that the peak amount of two bank accounts with Axis Bank and ICICI Bank Ltd. taken together comes to ₹ 22,58,223/-, and the same has been confirmed as income in the hands of the assessee and the balance addition has been deleted. The Revenue could not controvert this finding of the CIT(A) that the peak balance in these two undisclosed bank accounts of the assessee has been rightly calculated at ₹ 22,58,223/-. In these facts of the case, we are of the view that no interference in the order of the CIT(A) is called for - Decided against revenue Addition on account of unaccounted closing bank balance - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - We find that the peak amount in these two undisclosed bank accounts with Axis Bank and ICICI Bank Ltd. has been worked out at ₹ 22,58,223/- which has been directed by the CIT(A) to assess in the hands of the assessee, and therefore, there is no justification for separate addition of the closing balance as on the last date of the relevant period in these bank accounts of the assessee. The peak balance in these bank accounts of the assessee would always be higher than the closing balance in the same bank accounts, and therefore, since the higher amount has already been assessed to tax in these bank accounts, no separate addition for closing balance in these bank accounts of the assessee is justified. In this view of the matter, the order of the CIT(A) on this issue is confirmed - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
1. Deletion of addition on account of low GP
2. Addition made on undisclosed bank accounts
3. Deletion of addition on unaccounted closing bank balance

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deletion of addition on account of low GP
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 1,34,836 on account of low GP for the Asstt. Year 2008-2009. The Revenue argued that the fall in GP was unexplained by the assessee, justifying the addition. However, the CIT(A) noted that the assessee had started a new business concern dealing in low-end saris with no prior business in the earlier year. A stock transfer of Rs. 22.39 lakhs from the old concern to the new one was also highlighted. The CIT(A) found the fall in GP to be marginal and without any specific defects in the account books. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

Issue 2: Addition made on undisclosed bank accounts
The Revenue contested the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,46,75,333 representing transactions in two undisclosed bank accounts of the assessee. The CIT(A) had confirmed an addition of Rs. 22,58,223, being the peak amount of both accounts combined, out of the total undisclosed amount. The Tribunal noted that only the peak amount in such cases could be added as income, not the total credit side. As the CIT(A) correctly calculated the peak balance at Rs. 22,58,223, the Tribunal found no grounds for interference, dismissing the Revenue's appeal on this issue.

Issue 3: Deletion of addition on unaccounted closing bank balance
The Revenue challenged the deletion of an addition of Rs. 11,51,810 made on account of unaccounted closing bank balance in the undisclosed bank accounts. The CIT(A) had already assessed the peak amount in the accounts as income. The Tribunal agreed that since the peak balance had been assessed and would always be higher than the closing balance, no separate addition for the closing balance was warranted. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition, dismissing the Revenue's appeal on this issue.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal in its entirety, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on all three issues.