2014 (6) TMI 35 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of Direction given by CIT(A) - GP additions Direction for re-computation of profits Held that - Assessee is in the business of purchase and sale of cars as a dealer of Maruti Udyog Ltd., and there is no scope for any business outside the books of account in this line of business of the assessee - CIT(A) has directed the AO to make a uniform addition worked out at 1% of the sales declared by the assessee, net of the sales tax - CIT(A) has noted that the AO has not brought forth any evidence to bring on record specific details of discrepancy or the unaccounted capital employed by the assessee or the modus operandi of tax evasion - the assessee has not been able to explain all the discrepancies noticed and reconcile the differences noticed with regard to purchases and sales - the average net profit rate arrived at by the assessee in each of the years works out to 0.16% - thus, the order of the CIT(A) is modified and the AO is directed to restrict the additions in each of the years, so as to result in a net profit of 0.16% on the differential turnover, over and above the profit declared by the assessee Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Addition u/s 43B and section 40A(3) of the Act - Estimation of income from business Held that - The contention of the assessee is accepted that the income of the assessee from business, having been determined by resorting to estimation, there is no scope for any separate addition Relying upon Indwell Constructions V/s. CIT 1998 (3) TMI 121 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court thus, the additions are set aside - the income that may be determined by the AO for each of the years, shall not fall below the income returned by the assessee for the relevant year, and in case returned income is higher for any year(s), returned income shall be accepted Decided partly in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeals.
2. Discrepancies in purchases and sales figures.
3. Additions under Sections 43B and 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act.
4. Estimation of Gross Profit (G.P.) and Net Profit (N.P.).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeals:
The assessee filed appeals with a delay of 345 days, citing discontinuation of business and vacating of premises as reasons. The Tribunal found a reasonable cause for the delay, condoned it, and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merits.

2. Discrepancies in Purchases and Sales Figures:
The assessee, a dealer in Maruti Udyog Ltd. (MUL) cars, was found to have discrepancies between purchases and sales as per its books and those reported by MUL and Sales Tax Authorities. The discrepancies led to additions by the Assessing Officer (AO) for various assessment years. The CIT(A) noted that while the AO did not produce evidence of purchases and sales outside the books, the assessee also failed to reconcile discrepancies. The CIT(A) decided that the appropriate method was to reject the books and estimate the G.P., directing the AO to add 1% G.P. to the sales declared by the assessee.

3. Additions under Sections 43B and 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act:
The CIT(A) sustained the additions made by the AO under Sections 43B and 40A(3), as the assessee could not explain the discrepancies during appellate proceedings. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the income from business should be estimated and that no separate additions under these sections should be made once the income is estimated, referencing the jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Indwell Constructions (232 ITR 776).

4. Estimation of Gross Profit (G.P.) and Net Profit (N.P.):
The assessee contested the CIT(A)'s direction to add 1% G.P. uniformly across all years, arguing that it was unfair given the varying G.P. rates disclosed by the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had acknowledged the AO's failure to provide specific details of discrepancies or unaccounted capital. The Tribunal modified the CIT(A)'s order, directing the AO to estimate the net profit on differential turnover at 0.16%, based on the average N.P. rate disclosed by the assessee, and to make additions accordingly. The Tribunal also specified that the income determined should not fall below the returned income for any year.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, modifying the CIT(A)'s order to restrict additions to achieve a net profit rate of 0.16% on the differential turnover and deleting separate additions under Sections 43B and 40A(3). The income determined for each year should not be less than the returned income.