2018 (6) TMI 450 - HC - Income Tax

Adoption of special auditor s report only in part - estimation made on the assessment - validity of audit report based on sampling made by the Auditor - Auditing and Assurance Standard (AAS)-15-Audit Sampling - Held that - AO accepted the sampling done by the special auditor and computed the percentage of cash collection and profit derived, discernible from 8 out of 84 chitty transactions, as arrived at by the special auditor - we find that there is no valid ground available to challenge the sampling or the computation of income made based on the special auditor s report, which the company would have earned from 84 chitties - thus we are of the opinion that there is nothing wrong in the estimation based on the computation made and the assessment carried out by the AO - hence appeal of assessee is rejected.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal
2. Validity of appointment of special auditor and reliance on the auditor's report
3. Estimation of income based on the special auditor's report
4. Expenditure for earning undisclosed income in block assessment

Analysis:

1. Question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal:
The High Court initially found no question of law arising from the Tribunal's order, but upon specific pointing out by the respondent's counsel, a particular question regarding the adoption of the special auditor's report was considered for examination. The Court decided to focus on this question, even though it could potentially lead to an allegation of perversity.

2. Validity of appointment of special auditor and reliance on the auditor's report:
The case involved a chitty company subjected to a search, leading to the appointment of a special auditor. The Assessing Officer relied on the special auditor's report for computation, which was contested by the appellant. The Division Bench upheld the appointment of the special auditor and the reliance on the report. However, the estimation of income based on the report was remanded for further verification by the first appellate authority.

3. Estimation of income based on the special auditor's report:
The Court examined the sampling method used by the special auditor, finding it in accordance with auditing standards. The computation of income, including cash collection and undisclosed profit, was upheld based on discrepancies found in the company's accounts. The Court concluded that there was no irregularity in the computation based on the special auditor's report.

4. Expenditure for earning undisclosed income in block assessment:
The Court addressed the issue of expenditure for earning undisclosed income, which was computed at 15.5% of the profit. The appellant argued for the inclusion of total expenditure shown in the profit and loss account, but the Court held that such expenditure for the entire block period should have been claimed separately in regular assessments. The undisclosed income revealed during the block period was the focus of assessment, and the Court declined to interfere with the computation made by the Assessing Officer.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the assessment order, finding no grounds to challenge the sampling, computation of income, or the estimation based on the special auditor's report. The Court emphasized the distinction between block assessment and regular assessments, affirming the validity of the assessment carried out by the Assessing Officer. The appeal was rejected, acknowledging the contributions of the special auditor and the Assessing Officer in the process.