2014 (11) TMI 403 - AT - Income Tax

Rejection of books of accounts Principle of natural justice Counsel of the assessee contended that the books of accounts are not properly examined Reasons for rejection of books of accounts valid or not - Held that - Following the decision in Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta Through L/H Smt. Jyoti H. Mehta Versus The DCIT, Central. Cir. 23, Mumbai 2014 (10) TMI 795 - ITAT MUMBAI - The first reason for rejection of books is that the books of accounts are not contemporaneous - there is no denial that the books of accounts are not contemporaneous - the books of accounts have been prepared much after the close of the accounting year - rejecting the books of accounts on this ground is not justified because the books have actually been prepared much after the close of the accounting year - the books cannot be rejected merely because they are unaudited - All that has to be seen is that whether the books of accounts give a true and fair view or not. If the books of accounts have never been examined how can the revenue authorities say that the books are not complete - The revenue authorities should have specifically pointed out which part of the books is not complete - Without pointing out any specific/direct mistake, a general statement stating that the books are not complete would not do any justice - CIT(A) observed that most of the entries in the books of accounts are in the form of journal entries in the names of related person it could not be understood as to how can this be a reason for rejecting the books of accounts - When a person is maintaining books of accounts on mercantile system of accounting, obviously, most of the entries would be in the form of journal entries - the books of accounts have been prepared on the basis of the evidences which are seized by the authorities which mean that they are still in the possession of the department/custodian - There is no specific instance pointed out which is not backed by any primary documentary evidence - It is also not clear whether the assessee was ever called for to explain any of the transactions recorded in the books of accounts - In the absence of the verification of primary document vis- -vis entries in the books, assessee s accounts cannot be treated as unreliable - The books were rejected by the Revenue authorities - the books have been rejected by the department on flimsy grounds without independently examining each and every entry and confronting specific discrepancy, if any, to the assessee - the AO is directed to verify/examine each and every entry in the books of accounts Decided in favour of assessee.

2014 (10) TMI 795 - AT

2019 (2) TMI 1198 - AT

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice.
2. Determination of income based on final books of account.
3. Compliance with the order of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
4. Presumption of sale made by the Assessing Officer for shares in shortage.
5. Additions made by the Assessing Officer relying on various sources of information.
6. Method of determination of income by the Assessing Officer.
7. Addition on account of profit on sale of shares in shortage.
8. Exclusion of shares purchased by the appellant for clients.
9. Credit for shares sold between 01.04.1992 and 08.06.1992.
10. Credit for shares for which deliveries are yet to be received.
11. Credit for shares placed as security with lenders.
12. Credit for unregistered shares disclosed by Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta.
13. Credit for shares reported as missing, stolen, lost, misplaced, etc.
14. Application of closing rates as on 31.03.1992 for determining profit on sale of shares.
15. Addition of Rs. 49,01,92,114 on account of share market oversold position.
16. Addition of Rs. 24,76,36,178 on account of unexplained money.
17. Addition of Rs. 56,35,451 on account of share market speculative profit.
18. Addition of Rs. 60,99,584 on account of share market badla income.
19. Addition of Rs. 55,33,841 on account of dividend and interest income.
20. Set off of addition on account of source against the application of such source based on telescoping theory.
21. Disallowance of deduction on account of interest expenditure.
22. Rejection of the claim of deduction of other expenses as per the books of account.
23. Deduction u/s 48 of the Act.
24. Enhancement of income as proposed by the Assessing Officer.
25. Violation of principles of natural justice while making enhancement of income.
26. Enhancement of income amounting to Rs. 164,60,46,992 on account of alleged difference in the books of accounts.
27. Levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The first ground raised by the assessee regarding the violation of principles of natural justice was not pressed by the counsel for the assessee and hence, dismissed as not pressed.

2. Determination of Income Based on Final Books of Account:
The assessee contended that the income should have been determined based on the final books of account. The Tribunal noted that in a similar case of Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta, the matter was restored to the files of the CIT(A) for proper examination of the books of accounts. The Tribunal observed that the books of accounts were rejected on several grounds such as being non-contemporaneous, unaudited, incomplete, and not backed by primary documentary evidence. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify/examine each entry in the books of accounts without prejudice and to confront the assessee with any specific discrepancies.

3. Compliance with the Order of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal:
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) failed to comply with the Tribunal's previous order to examine the books of accounts properly. The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the books of accounts as per the directions given in the earlier order.

4. Presumption of Sale Made by the Assessing Officer for Shares in Shortage:
The Tribunal found that the presumption of sale made by the AO for shares in shortage was not justified. It directed the AO to re-examine the books of accounts and verify the transactions related to the shares in shortage.

5. Additions Made by the Assessing Officer Relying on Various Sources of Information:
The Tribunal observed that the additions made by the AO were based on various sources of information without proper verification of the books of accounts. It directed the AO to re-examine the books of accounts and verify the sources of information.

6. Method of Determination of Income by the Assessing Officer:
The Tribunal noted that the method of determination of income by the AO was not proper as it was based on the rejection of the books of accounts without proper examination. It directed the AO to re-determine the income after examining the books of accounts.

7. Addition on Account of Profit on Sale of Shares in Shortage:
The Tribunal found that the addition on account of profit on sale of shares in shortage was not justified. It directed the AO to re-examine the books of accounts and verify the transactions related to the sale of shares in shortage.

8. Exclusion of Shares Purchased by the Appellant for Clients:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the books of accounts and verify the shares purchased by the appellant for clients and exclude them from the addition.

9. Credit for Shares Sold Between 01.04.1992 and 08.06.1992:
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant credit for shares sold by the appellant between 01.04.1992 and 08.06.1992 after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

10. Credit for Shares for Which Deliveries are Yet to be Received:
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant credit for shares for which deliveries are yet to be received after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

11. Credit for Shares Placed as Security with Lenders:
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant credit for shares placed as security with lenders after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

12. Credit for Unregistered Shares Disclosed by Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta:
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant credit for unregistered shares disclosed by Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

13. Credit for Shares Reported as Missing, Stolen, Lost, Misplaced, etc.:
The Tribunal directed the AO to grant credit for shares reported as missing, stolen, lost, misplaced, etc., after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

14. Application of Closing Rates as on 31.03.1992 for Determining Profit on Sale of Shares:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the application of closing rates as on 31.03.1992 for determining profit on sale of shares after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

15. Addition of Rs. 49,01,92,114 on Account of Share Market Oversold Position:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the addition of Rs. 49,01,92,114 on account of share market oversold position after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

16. Addition of Rs. 24,76,36,178 on Account of Unexplained Money:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the addition of Rs. 24,76,36,178 on account of unexplained money after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

17. Addition of Rs. 56,35,451 on Account of Share Market Speculative Profit:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the addition of Rs. 56,35,451 on account of share market speculative profit after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

18. Addition of Rs. 60,99,584 on Account of Share Market Badla Income:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the addition of Rs. 60,99,584 on account of share market badla income after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

19. Addition of Rs. 55,33,841 on Account of Dividend and Interest Income:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the addition of Rs. 55,33,841 on account of dividend and interest income after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

20. Set Off of Addition on Account of Source Against the Application of Such Source Based on Telescoping Theory:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the set off of addition on account of source against the application of such source based on telescoping theory after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

21. Disallowance of Deduction on Account of Interest Expenditure:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the disallowance of deduction on account of interest expenditure after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

22. Rejection of the Claim of Deduction of Other Expenses as per the Books of Account:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the rejection of the claim of deduction of other expenses as per the books of account after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

23. Deduction u/s 48 of the Act:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the deduction u/s 48 of the Act after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

24. Enhancement of Income as Proposed by the Assessing Officer:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the enhancement of income as proposed by the AO after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

25. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice While Making Enhancement of Income:
The Tribunal noted that the enhancement of income was made without considering all the submissions of the appellant, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. It directed the AO to re-examine the enhancement of income after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

26. Enhancement of Income Amounting to Rs. 164,60,46,992 on Account of Alleged Difference in the Books of Accounts:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the enhancement of income amounting to Rs. 164,60,46,992 on account of alleged difference in the books of accounts after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

27. Levy of Interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act:
The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act after verifying the transactions in the books of accounts.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the AO for re-examination of the books of accounts and directed the AO to verify each entry and confront the assessee with specific discrepancies. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

← Previous Next →