2019 (5) TMI 2029 - AT - Income Tax

Undisclosed receipts - contention of the AR that the assessee is a retired army officer and engaged in the business activities of security agency - HELD THAT - Assessee as submits that gross profit 18.82% may be adopted for the undisclosed receipts as found by the A.O and confirmed by the CIT(A). The ld. DR reported no objection for the said rate of gross profit. Therefore as relying on M/s Royal Security Guarding (P) Ltd 2016 (9) TMI 1427 - ITAT KOLKATA wherein held that the entire contract receipt cannot be added as income and all expenses including the expenses relatable to undisclosed receipts from execution of contract job work has to be taken into consideration while arriving at the total income. Thus the matter is remanded to the file of A.O for calculation of gross profit @18.82% to the gross receipt. Additions on account of loan received - HELD THAT - As it is open to the assessee that the loans and advances had been brought into the business activity resulting into only one addition. While dealing with Ground Nos.2 3 in the aforementioned paras we directed the A.O to adopt gross profit @18.82% and the said gross profit must have arisen from conducting business involving the expenditure incurred out of that income and therefore method of telescoping is required to be applied in such circumstances. We deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of A.O for telescoping the loans and advances received by the assessee from the parties. Thus Ground Nos.4 5 are allowed for statistical purposes. Unexplained cash credit - contention of assessee deposited cash withdrawals again in the same bank in the same year - No evidence showing the same were before the AO and CIT(A) - HELD THAT - DR reported no objection in remanding the matter to the file to the A.O for his fresh consideration. Admittedly there was no material evidence before the AO to arrive at the conclusion to the issues raised in Ground No.6. The submissions of AR and DR and the material evidence placed we remand the matter to the file of A.O for his fresh adjudication. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences if any in support of his claim.

Summary

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The appeal raises several issues for consideration:

1. Whether the additions made on account of undisclosed receipts were justified.

2. Whether the additions related to loans received by the assessee were valid.

3. Whether the additions concerning unexplained cash credits were appropriate.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

1. Additions on Account of Undisclosed Receipts

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Tribunal considered the precedent set by the 'SMC' Bench in the case of Sri Asok Kumar Pal, which relied on the decision in M/s Royal Security Guarding (P) Ltd. by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court. This precedent established that not the entire contract receipt should be added as income; instead, all related expenses must be considered to determine the total income.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the assessee, a retired army officer engaged in a security agency business, was subject to similar circumstances as the precedent case. The Tribunal concluded that a gross profit rate of 18.82% should be applied to the undisclosed receipts, as opposed to the entire amount being considered as income.

Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal applied the precedent to the present case, determining that the gross profit rate of 18.82% was appropriate for calculating the income from undisclosed receipts.

Conclusions: The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer (A.O) to calculate the gross profit at the rate of 18.82%, allowing the grounds for statistical purposes.

2. Additions Related to Loans Received

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The A.O had added the amounts related to unsecured loans and advances to the total income, citing the lack of satisfactory explanation and proof of genuineness and creditworthiness.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal observed that while the assessee provided loan confirmations and PAN details, the genuineness and creditworthiness were not adequately demonstrated. The Tribunal considered the method of telescoping, which allows for the adjustment of one addition against the income generated from business activities.

Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal found it proper to apply telescoping, as the gross profit accepted in the earlier grounds could cover the loans and advances, resulting in only one addition.

Conclusions: The Tribunal remanded the issue to the A.O to apply telescoping to the loans and advances, allowing the grounds for statistical purposes.

3. Additions Concerning Unexplained Cash Credits

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The A.O added amounts as unexplained cash credits due to a lack of evidence supporting the assessee's claim that cash withdrawals were redeposited.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted that no evidence was presented before the A.O or CIT(A) to support the assessee's claim. However, a chart showing cash deposits was submitted during the appeal.

Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal accepted the submission of new evidence and deemed it appropriate to remand the matter for fresh consideration by the A.O.

Conclusions: The Tribunal remanded the issue to the A.O for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee to submit further evidence, thus allowing the ground for statistical purposes.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Core Principles Established: The Tribunal reaffirmed the principle that not all receipts should be treated as income without considering related expenses. It also emphasized the application of telescoping in cases where business income can cover additions related to loans and advances.

Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Tribunal allowed all grounds raised by the assessee for statistical purposes, remanding each issue to the A.O for recalculations and fresh adjudication based on the principles and evidence presented.