2012 (10) TMI 474 - AT - Income Tax

Addition made on account of rejection of books Held that - As there is no allegation in order of lower authority about the correctness or completeness of books, sales recorded, method of accounting. Only allegation is that accounting standard has not been followed in valuation of inventories and sales are not amenable to verification. The valuation of stock has no negative impact on the overall result of this year as shown at cost. Decides in favour of assessee. Disallowance of bad debts claim u/s 36(1)(vii) Assessee claims bad debts of advances made to parties for promoting the business since they are outstanding from long time Held that - As the purpose of advances is not ascertainable. Assessee failed to filed his past accounts and particular the account for the year in which the money was advanced has also not been furnished. Therefore contention that the amount was given for promoting business is not substantiated. Decision in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of books of account under section 145(3) and estimation of income under 'Profit & Gains of Business'.
2. Dispute over the rejection of trading results and estimation of profits.
3. Enhancement of income by writing off advances.

Issue 1:
The case involved cross-appeals by the assessee and the revenue regarding the rejection of books of account under section 145(3) and the estimation of income under the head 'Profit & Gains of Business.' The assessee argued against the rejection of accounts, citing compliance with accounting standards and verifiable sales. The revenue contended that the accounts were unreliable, pointing out valuation discrepancies and unverifiable sales. The tribunal found in favor of the assessee, noting that the valuation of inventory did not impact the revenue negatively, and there was no evidence to reject the accounts. The rejection of the book profit declared by the assessee was deemed unjustified, leading to the allowance of ground No. 1 in the assessee's appeal.

Issue 2:
The dispute centered on the rejection of trading results and the subsequent estimation of profits. The assessee's sales were initially estimated by the Assessing Officer, and the profit was calculated at 10% of sales. The CIT(A) revised the sales and profit figures, leading to a further appeal. The tribunal analyzed the valuation of inventory, sales realization, and the method of accounting. It was concluded that the lower authorities erred in rejecting the book profit declared by the assessee. Ground No. 1 in the revenue's appeal was dismissed, aligning with the decision on the assessee's appeal.

Issue 3:
The issue involved the enhancement of income by writing off advances, which the CIT(A) disallowed as bad debts. The assessee argued that the amounts were incidental to business operations and should be treated as business losses under sections 28 or 37(1). The tribunal examined the nature of the advances and found that they represented capital losses rather than bad debts. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the amounts could not be allowed as bad debts under section 36(1)(vii). The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, while the revenue's appeal was dismissed.