2012 (9) TMI 216 - AT - Income Tax

Additions of capital introduced by partners - CIT (A) deleted the addition - Held that - The explanation given by the assessee regarding source of fund available to the partners to introduce capital is not supported by any evidence - The availability of funds with the partners was not at all disclosed in their respective returns of income. Being so, it is not possible to come to a conclusion that the partners are having sources to introduce capital in the firm - that in such a situation where there is a credit entry in the books of account of the assessee and there is no satisfactory explanation, then it will be deemed to be the income of the firm and will be added to the income of the firm and can be accordingly taxed. The view taken by the CIT (A) appears to be erroneous on the face of it - against the assessee. Addition made on account of estimation of income - CIT (A) restricted the addition to Rs. 75,000 - Held that - The books of account of the assessee are not reliable and expenses were not supported by proper vouchers. Being so, AO is justified in rejecting the books of account and estimating the income. However, the estimation of income at 10% of the gross receipts is at higher side, thus the net profit at 9% of gross receipts instead of 10% as estimated by the Assessing Officer need to be made - CIT (A) was not justified in sustaining only Rs. 75,000 towards this count without any basis - partly in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deletion of additions on account of capital introduced by partners
2. Estimation of income and deletion of additions

Deletion of additions on account of capital introduced by partners:

The issue revolves around the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding the capital introduced by two partners of the assessee firm. The partners explained the source of their investments, but the Assessing Officer considered a significant portion of the capital as unexplained income. The CIT(A) deleted the additions based on the partners being assessed to tax and relied on a judgment of the Gujarat High Court. The Revenue appealed, arguing that the genuineness of the transactions and the capacity of the partners to introduce the capital were not adequately proven. The Tribunal analyzed the evidence provided by the assessee and concluded that while the identity of the parties was established, the explanation regarding the source of funds available to the partners was unsupported by evidence. Citing precedents from various High Courts, the Tribunal held that in the absence of satisfactory explanations for credit entries in the books, such amounts would be deemed as income of the firm. Consequently, the Tribunal decided against the assessee, reversing the CIT(A)'s order on this issue.

Estimation of income and deletion of additions:

The second issue pertains to the estimation of income by the Assessing Officer due to the lack of proper vouchers for expenses in the assessee's books of account. The Assessing Officer estimated the income at 10% of the gross receipts, which was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, restricting the addition to Rs. 75,000 and deleting the balance. Upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal acknowledged the lack of reliability in the assessee's books of account and the absence of proper vouchers for expenses. While upholding the rejection of the books of account, the Tribunal found the 10% estimation by the Assessing Officer to be on the higher side. Considering the nature of the business activity and the plea for a reasonable estimation, the Tribunal adjusted the net profit to 9% of gross receipts instead. The Tribunal deemed the CIT(A)'s decision to sustain only Rs. 75,000 towards this count without a basis as unjustified. As a result, the Revenue's appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal.

---