9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against CIT(A) order for assessment year 2007-08 regarding deletion of addition made u/s 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 based on net profit rate.
Issue 1: Deletion of addition based on net profit rate The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A) order which deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer by applying a net profit rate of 3% on estimated sales of Rs. 16.82 crores u/s 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee, engaged in retail sale of liquor, had shown total sales of Rs. 13.76 crores with a net profit rate of 1.2%. The AO rejected the books of accounts due to unverifiable sales and applied a higher net profit rate. However, the CIT(A) held that the AO was unjustified in rejecting the maintained books of account and not disturbing the declared results, as there was no evidence of discrepancies in sales or purchases. The CIT(A) emphasized that the AO did not provide any proof of sales outside the books or any stock discrepancies. The CIT(A) referred to a similar case and concluded that rejection of books merely due to lack of cash vouchers was not justified. Therefore, the addition made by the AO was deleted, and the results declared by the appellant were accepted. Issue 2: Assessment of net profit rate During the assessment proceedings, the assessee presented all books of account without discrepancies in sales and purchases. The AO rejected the books solely because the assessee did not issue sales bills copies and applied a net profit rate of 3%. The CIT(A) noted that liquor purchases were based on permits and no adverse findings were made by the AO. The CIT(A) highlighted that daily sales were recorded, and there was no evidence of sales outside the books or suppressed sales. The CIT(A) also mentioned the impact of changes in excise law policy on profit margins. Despite these findings, the unverifiable sales figures remained. Considering the circumstances, the Tribunal modified the lower authorities' orders and directed the AO to apply a net profit rate of 1.5% instead of the declared 1.25%. The Revenue's appeal was allowed in part based on these considerations. This judgment highlights the importance of maintaining accurate records and the burden of proof on tax authorities to justify adjustments based on estimated figures under the Income-tax Act, 1961.
|
