9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (9) TMI 189 - AT - Income TaxUnaccounted deposits in bank account & sale proceeds - search and seizure operation - assessee adopted the rate of 5% of the total deposit as income from unaccounted sales for AY 2005-06 - Held that - AO was not justified in treating the entire deposits in ICICI bank as unaccounted income of the assessee as that once the deposit in the bank has been accepted by the AO as unaccounted sales proceeds, then, the entire amount cannot be treated as undisclosed income - the estimation of the profit on account of unaccounted sales cannot be made on the line of profit on accounted sales since the assessee has already booked all indirect expenses in the books of account, therefore, the profit from the unaccounted sales is required to be worked out by reducing the direct expenditure relating to the unaccounted sales. Therefore, for computing the profit on unaccounted sale, the gross profit ratio on the accounted sale is a relevant factor - AO is accordingly, directed to compute the profit on deposits in the ICICI bank by taking the rate equivalent to the GP rate declared by the assessee - in favour of assessee. AY 2007 08 - addition of the peak credits - Held that - As assessee admitted the deposits in the ICICI bank account as representing unaccounted sales proceeds and, accordingly, worked out the total unaccounted income at Rs. 25,45,500/- being the difference of total unaccounted sales including the deposits made in the bank account and the expenditure as recorded in the seized diary AO was bound to give credit for undisclosed income of Rs. 25,45,500/-already arrived at and added to the income of the assessee while making the addition on account of peak credit - same amount cannot be taxed twice once as offered by the assessee being profit on unaccounted sales and again being part of peak credit - in favour of assessee. AY 2008-09 - unexplained money by taking peak cash credit/balance as on 30/12/2007 - Held that - When the entire transactions recorded in the seized diary were taken into account while computing the profit from unaccounted sales as well as peak credit, then, a further addition on account of peak credit, which is very much part of the entries of the diary already considered cannot be permitted - in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Treatment of unaccounted sales and corresponding purchases. 2. Treatment of deposits in the undisclosed ICICI bank account. 3. Estimation of profit on unaccounted sales. 4. Addition on account of peak credit. 5. Addition towards unexplained investment in purchase of stock. 6. Treatment of unaccounted sales for different assessment years. Detailed Analysis: I. Treatment of Unaccounted Sales and Corresponding Purchases: The revenue argued that the assessee failed to produce evidence that withdrawals from the unaccounted ICICI bank account were used for unaccounted purchases. The assessee admitted that the ICICI account represented unaccounted sales but did not provide evidence of corresponding unaccounted purchases. The CIT(A) directed that only 5% of the total deposits in the ICICI bank be treated as unaccounted income, which the revenue contested. II. Treatment of Deposits in the Undisclosed ICICI Bank Account: The revenue contended that the entire deposits in the ICICI bank account should be treated as undisclosed income. The CIT(A) disagreed and directed that only 5% of the total deposits be considered as unaccounted income. The tribunal found that once deposits are accepted as unaccounted sales proceeds, the entire amount cannot be treated as undisclosed income. The profit from unaccounted sales should be computed by reducing direct expenditure, using the gross profit (GP) ratio declared by the assessee. III. Estimation of Profit on Unaccounted Sales: The assessee offered undisclosed income by taking a profit margin of 5% on sales or 5.26% on purchases. The CIT(A) accepted this method, but the revenue argued that the profit margin should be higher. The tribunal directed the AO to compute the profit on deposits in the ICICI bank by taking the rate equivalent to the GP rate declared by the assessee. IV. Addition on Account of Peak Credit: For the assessment year 2007-08, the AO made an addition of Rs. 30,40,477/- as peak credit, treating it as unexplained money. The CIT(A) directed the AO to give credit for undisclosed income already offered by the assessee while making the addition on account of peak credit. The tribunal upheld this view, stating that the same amount cannot be taxed twice. V. Addition Towards Unexplained Investment in Purchase of Stock: The AO made an addition of Rs. 31,85,555/- for unexplained investment in stock for the assessment year 2008-09. The assessee argued that this investment was made from the income offered in the previous year. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, but the tribunal set aside the issue to the CIT(A) for reconsideration and adjudication as per law. VI. Treatment of Unaccounted Sales for Different Assessment Years: - Assessment Year 2005-06: The AO treated the entire deposit of Rs. 3,04,500/- in the ICICI bank as unaccounted income. The CIT(A) directed that only 5% of the total deposit be treated as unaccounted income. The tribunal directed the AO to compute profit using the GP rate declared by the assessee. - Assessment Year 2006-07: The AO treated Rs. 21,92,984/- as unaccounted income. The tribunal directed the AO to compute profit using the GP rate declared by the assessee. - Assessment Year 2007-08: The AO made an addition of Rs. 30,40,477/- as peak credit. The CIT(A) directed the AO to give credit for Rs. 25,45,500/- already offered by the assessee. The tribunal upheld this decision. - Assessment Year 2008-09: The AO made an addition of Rs. 17,55,842/- as peak credit. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. - Assessment Year 2009-10: The AO treated the entire sale of Rs. 16,60,837/- as undisclosed income. The tribunal directed the AO to compute profit using the GP rate declared by the assessee. Conclusion: The tribunal partly allowed the revenue's appeals and allowed the assessee's cross-objection for statistical purposes. The AO was directed to compute the profit on unaccounted sales using the GP rate declared by the assessee and to reconsider the issue of unexplained investment in stock. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to give credit for undisclosed income already offered by the assessee while making additions on account of peak credit.
|
