2014 (11) TMI 939 - HC - Income Tax

Unaccounted business income and unexplained investment - Sales of silver ornaments not reflected in the books of account - Held that - Assessment made is just and proper - The statements made in the affidavits are not based on any record or corroborated with cogent evidence - The presumption raised by the papers which were seized from the custody of the assessee had not been rebutted Decided against assessee. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Held that - The penalty has been wrongly imposed u/s 271(1)(c) in Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Krishi Tyre Retreading and Rubber Industries 2014 (2) TMI 21 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT it has been held that as the addition had been sustained purely on estimate basis and no positive fact or finding had been had been found so as to even make the addition which was a pure guess work, no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act could be said to be leviable on such guess work or estimation Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Assessment of unaccounted business income for the assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88, and 1988-89.
2. Challenge against the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Assessment of Unaccounted Business Income
The appellant challenged the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the assessment of unaccounted business income for the mentioned assessment years. The Tribunal inferred unaccounted business income and unexplained investments based on the evidence on record. The appellant contended that the Tribunal erred in making these inferences. The appeals questioned the validity of the additions made by the assessing officer concerning unaccounted business profits from sales of silver ornaments not reflected in the books of account. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) and the Tribunal upheld the additions without considering crucial factors like the stages of melting involved in the process. The appellant's advocate highlighted the lack of irregularities in the maintained books of accounts and the oversight of affidavits filed by workers. However, the court found the assessment just and proper, stating that the affidavits lacked corroborated evidence, and the seized papers were not rebutted. Consequently, the appeals challenging the assessment were dismissed.

Issue 2: Challenge Against Penalty Imposed
The appellant also contested the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was sustained by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, but the appellant argued against its justification. The appellant's advocate referenced legal precedents to support the argument that the penalty was wrongly imposed. Citing cases like Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Krishi Tyre Retreading and Rubber Industries, the appellant contended that penalties cannot be levied based on estimates or guesswork without concrete evidence. The court agreed with the appellant's position, stating that the penalty was unjustified as it was solely based on estimation without factual basis. Consequently, the appeals challenging the penalty were allowed.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed Appeals No. 461 to 464 of 2000 related to the assessment of unaccounted business income and allowed Appeals No. 833 to 836 of 2005 challenging the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.