2018 (6) TMI 222 - AT - Income Tax

Rejection of the books of accounts - Held that - Assessee was not maintaining such accounts which may show the correct position of raw material /production of finished goods/remaining stock/shortage etc and detail of day to day consumption of raw material - assessee was not maintaining the quantitative records of consumption and production and there were other discrepancies found in respect of maintaining record - thus AO has correctly invoked the provisions of section 145 - Decided against the assessee. Unexplained expenditure incurred for marriage of son - Held that - CIT held that no separate addition on this account is required as the same has to be telescoped against the addition on account of other additions. We have already reduced the other additions in the case of the assessee, therefore, after taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case we do not find any merit in the appeal of the assessee Additions of unaccounted sales - Held that - There are so many factors which affect the net production and shortage, non-excisable products, ferrous and non-ferrous scrap etc., the Ld. CIT(A) has provided adequate relief to the assessee by restricting the addition to the extent of ₹ 19 lac being 50% - the fact that there are incomplete maintenance of records by the assessee we considered it will be appropriate to restrict the disallowance to the extent of 16 lacs - appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of books of account.
2. Addition of ?19,00,000 out of the total addition of ?38,00,000 for alleged unaccounted sales of machinery items.
3. Addition of ?5,00,000 for alleged additional expenditure on marriage.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of Books of Account:
The assessee's books of account were rejected under section 145(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer observed that the assessee did not maintain detailed records of day-to-day consumption of raw materials, production of finished goods, or remaining stock. The shortage claimed by the assessee was unverifiable, and the stock of finished goods was not disclosed. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection of the books of account, noting that the assessee's records did not accurately reflect the true position of its manufacturing and trading activities. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) and dismissed the assessee's appeal on this issue, citing various judicial precedents.

2. Addition for Alleged Unaccounted Sales of Machinery Items:
The assessing officer made an addition of ?38,00,000 for unaccounted sales of 7 DG sets and other machinery, based on discrepancies in the assessee's records and the non-disclosure of sales of certain machinery items. The CIT(A) partly sustained the addition, reducing it to ?19,00,000. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee failed to demonstrate the sale proceeds of the DG sets and other machinery in its books of account. The Tribunal further reduced the disallowance to ?16,00,000, considering the incomplete maintenance of records by the assessee and the nature of the business. The appeal was partly allowed on this issue.

3. Addition for Alleged Additional Expenditure on Marriage:
The assessing officer estimated an additional expenditure of ?5,00,000 for the marriage of the assessee's son, which was not disclosed in the capital account. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, noting that the assessee failed to provide details of expenditure on specific items such as jewelry, clothing, and other miscellaneous expenses. The CIT(A) also mentioned that the addition was to be telescoped against the addition for unaccounted sales of machinery. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding no merit in the assessee's appeal on this issue.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the books of account and partly allowed the appeal regarding the addition for unaccounted sales of machinery, reducing the disallowance to ?16,00,000. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal concerning the additional expenditure on marriage, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. The final order was pronounced on 12-01-2018.