2010 (12) TMI 886 - AT - Income Tax

Rejection of book of accounts - Addition - Estimation of gross profit @10% - since the books of account, bills and vouchers are not available, the book result stand rejected u/s 145(3) and he therefore, went ahead for estimating the income - assessee replied that the bills are prepared when each process is completed as on the date of balance sheet and the revenue is booked for total process wise work carried out by the assessee and therefore, there is no work in progress - The assessee claimed before the authorities below that bills are prepared at the end of the financial year and there was no work in progress and there was no stock of raw material which is supported by TDS certificates - it is clear that addition made and sustained by the authorities below is still excessive and unreasonable. The authorities below in the absence of books of accounts, bills, vouches and other details rightly rejected the book results of the assessee - there is no basis to compute the addition on account of work in progress which has no basis at all. The separate addition made on account of work in progress/closing stock is accordingly deleted Regarding disallowance of staff salary - Since the profit of the assessee is estimated by applying GP rate of 10% and the details of books of accounts have not been produced before the authorities below, no further addition is required to be made as per findings given above - appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Rejection of book results by the Assessing Officer (AO).
2. Addition of Rs. 8,30,000/- on account of estimation of gross profit (GP) at 10%.
3. Addition of Rs. 21,69,079/- on account of value of work in progress and closing stock of raw materials.
4. Disallowance of Rs. 3,62,492/- out of staff salary and material testing expenses.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of Book Results by the Assessing Officer:

The AO rejected the books of accounts, citing the destruction of records in a flood and discrepancies in the balance confirmations from certain parties. The AO noted that the books were claimed to be kept on the first floor, which was not affected by the flood, thus questioning the credibility of the assessee's claim. The CIT(A) upheld this rejection, stating that the claims in the trading and profit and loss account were unverifiable due to the absence of books, bills, and vouchers. The Tribunal agreed with the rejection, noting that the absence of books justified the estimation of profit.

2. Addition of Rs. 8,30,000/- on Account of Estimation of Gross Profit:

The AO estimated the GP at 10%, referencing similar government organizations and Section 44AD of the IT Act, which provides for an 8% estimation of net profit where no books are maintained. The assessee's GP rate of 8.54% was deemed low, and the AO made an addition of Rs. 8,30,600/-. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal upheld this addition, finding the 10% GP rate reasonable based on the assessee's history and the nature of the business.

3. Addition of Rs. 21,69,079/- on Account of Work in Progress and Closing Stock:

The AO added Rs. 21,69,079/- for work in progress, arguing that the assessee, a road construction contractor, must have some stock of material and work in progress at year-end. This was calculated based on the direct cost incurred in the last 15 days of the year. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, stating that the presence of work in progress was undeniable. However, the Tribunal found this addition excessive and based on assumptions. It noted that once the GP rate is applied, further additions like work in progress are unnecessary. The Tribunal deleted the addition for work in progress, emphasizing that the GP rate should account for all aspects of the business.

4. Disallowance of Rs. 3,62,492/- out of Staff Salary and Material Testing Expenses:

The AO disallowed Rs. 3,62,492/- for lack of supporting evidence. However, the Tribunal deleted this disallowance, reasoning that since the profit was estimated by applying a GP rate of 10% and books were not produced, no further addition was required.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal confirmed the rejection of the book results and the addition of Rs. 8,30,600/- based on a 10% GP rate. It deleted the separate addition of Rs. 21,69,079/- for work in progress and the disallowance of Rs. 3,62,492/- for staff salary and material testing expenses. The appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing that the GP rate estimation should encompass all necessary adjustments.