2015 (9) TMI 754 - HC - Income Tax

Income from undisclosed sources - assessee failed to offer any explanation whatsoever regarding the source of investment in such suppressed purchases - application of N.P. rate - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that - 0nce the books of account were rejected, the best method of estimating the income of the appellant was to apply the net profit rate on the total purchases of the appellant. Since only the total purchases were verifiable the appellate authority found that the rate of 6% towards profit rate was fair and reasonable. We also find that the first appellate authority considered the practice adopted in this trading of rubber and held that person who intend to buy natural rubber, who do not have licence approaches the person who is having the licence, which in the instant case was the assessee who made the purchases on behalf of these unlicensed traders and consequently held, that in such a situation the addition on account of unexplained purchases made not be in order. This finding being based on appreciation of evidence requires no interference. In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion, that the deletion of suppressed purchases was rightly made by the first appellate authority and was also justified in estimating the income by applying a net profit rate of total purchases made by the assessee. - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of income based on suppressed purchases and rejected books of accounts.

Analysis:

1. The assessee, an individual dealing in natural rubber, filed a return for the assessment year 1996-97 showing an income of Rs. 1,00,500. The department discovered information indicating purchases of Rs. 1,63,75,285, higher than the disclosed amount of Rs. 1,07,09,532. Consequently, re-assessment proceedings were initiated, leading to the assessing officer applying a 10% net profit rate and adding Rs. 56,65,753 towards suppressed purchases from undisclosed sources. The appellate authority, however, allowed the appeal, deleting the suppressed purchases and reducing the profit rate to 6%. The appellate authority emphasized that rejecting the books of accounts justified applying a net profit rate to estimate income, considering only verifiable figures, i.e., purchases. The authority highlighted the trading practice in the rubber industry where license holders make purchases on behalf of unlicensed traders. The appellate authority directed the assessing officer to calculate the net profit based on the disclosed amount and adjust the balance accordingly.

2. The Department challenged the appellate authority's decision through an appeal, which was dismissed. Subsequently, the Department filed the present appeal, questioning the deletion of the addition on account of suppressed purchases. The High Court admitted the appeal based on substantial questions of law regarding the justification of upholding the deletion of the addition made by the assessing officer. Despite the service of notice and affidavit indicating service to the assessee, no representation was made on behalf of the assessee.

3. The High Court, after hearing the Department's counsel, upheld the decision of the appellate authority. It reiterated that once the books of accounts were rejected, the appropriate method to estimate income was by applying a net profit rate on total purchases, as only purchases were verifiable. The Court concurred with the appellate authority's reasoning that a 6% profit rate was fair and reasonable, considering the peculiar trading practices in the rubber industry. The Court found no reason to interfere with the appellate authority's decision, as it was based on a thorough evaluation of the evidence.

4. Therefore, the High Court concluded that the deletion of suppressed purchases and the estimation of income based on the net profit rate of total purchases were justified. The appeal filed by the Department was dismissed, and the question of law was answered accordingly, affirming the decision of the appellate authority.