1970 (9) TMI 4 - HC - Income Tax

Account books - AO found faults in the accounts - Whether there coould be any applicability of the proviso under section 13 of the Act

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of net income from food grains business, applicability of proviso under section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, competence of the reference under section 66 of the Act.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a reference under section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, involving the assessment of an individual assessee's net income from the food grains business for the assessment year 1950-51. The assessee, engaged in food grains and brick-kiln businesses, faced challenges in collecting grains for the government due to which he purchased food grains from the open market. Discrepancies arose between the price in the open market and the sanctioned purchase price, termed as "total money." The Income-tax Officer disputed the assessee's accounts, estimating the net income at Rs. 30,000, leading to an income tax assessment. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the assessment despite the assessee's objection, prompting a reference to the High Court.

The primary issue revolved around the applicability of the proviso under section 13 of the Act concerning the method of accounting. The assessee contended that the estimate of net income was arbitrary, challenging the rejection of his account books. The Income-tax Officer, relying on the sessions judge's observations in a criminal case against the assessee, questioned the credibility of the accounts. However, the High Court determined that the proviso to section 13 did not apply as the assessee maintained account books, and discrepancies did not render the income indeterminable. The Court clarified that faults in the accounts did not automatically trigger the proviso, emphasizing that the case did not fall under either circumstance warranting its application.

The Court scrutinized the Income-tax Officer's reasoning for estimating the income, emphasizing that the discrepancies in claimed expenses did not render the income indeterminable. The judgment highlighted that the discussion focused solely on the income from the food grains business. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding that the proviso under section 13 was inapplicable in this scenario. The High Court answered the referred question in the negative, granting costs to the assessee for the reference.