2017 (12) TMI 863 - HC - Income Tax

Rejection of books of accounts - G.P. rate determination - Held that - The assessee is not maintaining the day-to-day stock register and specific defects were also pointed out by the Assessing Officer in the books of account. In such circumstances and facts of the case, we find no infirmity in the order of the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) who has rightly confirmed the application of section 145(3) of the Act. As regards estimation of income, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and also confirmed by ITAT rightly directed the Assessing Officer to apply the gross profit rate of 11.5 per cent. on the basis of the past history of the assessee. - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Tribunal's decision confirming the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order.
- Application of section 145(3) regarding rejection of books of account.
- Estimation of gross profit rate.
- Treatment of interest earned on fixed deposit receipts.
- Hypothetical discussion on deduction under section 80HHC.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order. The substantial question of law raised was whether the Tribunal was correct in deleting the addition despite maintaining the application of section 145(3) for rejecting the books of account. The appellant contended that the Tribunal erred in confirming the order favoring the assessee.

2. The case involved an assessee-firm deriving income from manufacturing and exporting garments. The appellant declared a gross profit rate of 7.54% and a net profit rate of 7.93% on a total turnover of ?6,68,48,332. During assessment, discrepancies were found in the maintenance of records, with the auditor noting the absence of quantitative details. The Assessing Officer applied a gross profit rate of 23% due to insufficient evidence and discrepancies in the costing calculations.

3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the rejection of books of account due to the absence of day-to-day stock registers and specific defects highlighted by the Assessing Officer. However, the Commissioner disagreed with the comparison of the appellant's case with another firm for estimating gross profit. The treatment of interest earned on fixed deposit receipts was also disputed, with the Commissioner rejecting the claim that it was income derived from the export business.

4. The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the lack of proper record-keeping by the assessee and defects in the books of account. The Tribunal supported the application of section 145(3) and directed the Assessing Officer to use a gross profit rate of 11.5% based on the assessee's past history.

5. The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's reasoning, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Department. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the decision of the lower authorities.

6. The judgment clarified the issues surrounding the rejection of books of account, estimation of gross profit, treatment of interest income, and the application of relevant tax provisions. The decision highlighted the importance of maintaining accurate records and the proper application of statutory provisions in determining taxable income.