2022 (3) TMI 1179 - AT - Income Tax

Estimation of net profit - Rejection of books of accounts - HELD THAT - It is an undisputed fact that assessee did not produce the books of accounts and bill vouchers before the AO and in such a situation, AO had no other option but to estimate the profit of the assessee. As in the show cause notice, AO asked the assessee to show casue as to why the profits be not estimated @ 8% of the gross receipts but however the AO finally estimated the profits @ 15% of the gross receipts. We find that no opportunity was given to the assessee for explaining his stand with respect to the estimation of profit @ 15% of the gross receipts. AO was not justified in estimating the profit @15% in the gross receipt. Before us, AR has submitted that the estimation of profits @ 8% of gross receipts as specified in show-cause notice by AO would be acceptable to assessee. In such a situation, we direct the AO to estimate the profits on the basis of 8% gross receipt as per the show-cause notice issued by him to the assessee. We thus direct the AO accordingly. Thus the ground of the assessee is partly allowed.

Issues:
Estimation of net profit, rejection of books of accounts, quashing of ex-parte order, consideration of adjournment request, nature of surrender made during assessment proceedings, charging of interest under IT Act.

Estimation of Net Profit:
The AO estimated the net profit of the assessee at 15% of the gross receipts due to the absence of produced books of accounts. The CIT(A) upheld this estimation. However, the ITAT found that the AO did not provide the assessee with an opportunity to explain or justify the 15% estimation, as the show cause notice initially mentioned 8%. The ITAT directed the AO to estimate the profit based on 8% of the gross receipts, as per the show cause notice, concluding that the AO was not justified in estimating the profit at 15%.

Rejection of Books of Accounts:
The AO rejected the books of accounts of the assessee as the assessee claimed to have lost them and only provided an audit report and bank accounts. The AO found the accounts unreliable and incomplete, leading to the estimation of net profit. The CIT(A) upheld this rejection. However, the ITAT focused on the estimation issue and did not delve into the rejection of books of accounts in detail.

Quashing of Ex-parte Order:
The assessee raised concerns about the ex-parte order passed by the AO under section 144, alleging a lack of natural justice. The CIT(A) did not quash the ex-parte order. The ITAT did not address this issue specifically in its judgment.

Consideration of Adjournment Request:
The assessee requested an adjournment due to the accident suffered by the assessee's father, but the CIT(A) did not consider this request. The ITAT did not provide any specific ruling or analysis on this issue in the judgment.

Nature of Surrender Made During Assessment Proceedings:
The CIT(A) made observations about the nature of the surrender made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings, linking it to establishing a guilty nature. The ITAT did not delve into this issue in detail in its judgment.

Charging of Interest Under IT Act:
The CIT(A) did not reverse the action of the AO in charging interest under sections 234B, 234C, and 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT did not address this issue specifically in its judgment.

In summary, the ITAT partially allowed the appeal of the assessee concerning the estimation of net profit, directing the AO to estimate the profit based on 8% of the gross receipts as per the show cause notice. The judgment focused on the lack of opportunity provided to the assessee to explain the 15% estimation and did not extensively discuss other issues raised by the assessee, such as the rejection of books of accounts, quashing of the ex-parte order, consideration of adjournment request, nature of surrender made, and charging of interest under the IT Act.

← Previous Next →