2013 (12) TMI 240 - AT - Income Tax

Estimation of income allowability of remuneration and interest paid to partners - Held that - Income in this line of business has to be estimated at 5% of sales made by the assessees The claim of the assessee for further deduction towards remuneration and interest to partners cannot be accepted. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Dispute over the direction of CIT (A) to estimate income of assesses at 3% instead of 27% of stock put to sale by the AO.
- Claim by the assessee for allowability of remuneration and interest paid to partners.

Analysis:
1. The appeals by the Revenue and the Cross Objection by the assessee were against separate orders of CIT (A)-III, Hyderabad for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. Since the issue was common, they were heard together and disposed of by a combined order for convenience.

2. Both the assessee and the department contested the direction of CIT (A) to estimate the income of assesses at 3% instead of the 27% as determined by the AO regarding the stock put to sale. The assessee also sought the allowability of remuneration and interest paid to partners. It was clarified that there was no dispute regarding the sales figure determined by the Assessing Officer.

3. Upon hearing both parties and examining the material on record, the Tribunal referred to a similar issue in the case of ITO Vs. M/s Pittala Yakaiah, Nalgonda & Ors., wherein it was held that income of assesses in this line of business should be estimated at 5% of sales. Consequently, the AO was directed to estimate the income at 5% of sales net of all deductions for the assessee. The claim for additional deductions towards remuneration and interest to partners was not accepted.

4. As a result, the appeals by the Revenue were partly allowed, and the Cross Objections by the assessee were dismissed. The order was pronounced on 05-12-2012.

This judgment addressed the dispute over income estimation percentages and the allowability of certain deductions, providing a clear direction based on precedent and legal reasoning.