9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 354 - AT - Income TaxRejection of books of accounts - Net profit estimation - application of net profit rate of 8% on gross turnover - HELD THAT - AO while framing assessment has totally lost sight of the fact that during the year under consideration the Audited Accounts for year under consideration as well as for past assessment years were undisputedly available with the Department. It is not the case of the AO by drawing comparison with the past years Audited Accounts in the year under consideration assessee had either shown certain expenses in abnormal terms or that certain expenses were debited for an abnormal amount. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Additional CIT Vs Jai Engineering Works 1978 (2) TMI 94 - DELHI HIGH COURT had the occasion to consider a question that whether the report of the Auditor could be said to be 'material' on which reliance could be placed by the Income Tax Authorities. The Hon'ble High Court while approving the order passed by the Tribunal ruled that in case where books are not made available for AO's verification the AO should rely on the Audit Report because the said evidence is admissible under Indian Evidence Act, 1872. What would be the reasonable rate of Net Profit? - Since, the turnover has gone down but higher than the earlier years. Therefore, relying the past years trading results, in the present case, it may be an appropriate guide to go by past history. We are of the view, that it would be just fair, therefore, to apply N.P rate of 6% on gross receipts - We also make it clear that assessee shall not be entitled for any other deduction such as depreciation and interest paid. Thus, ground no. 1 is partly allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Application of net profit rate on gross turnover. 2. Rejection of book results. 3. Addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Application of Net Profit Rate on Gross Turnover The assessee contested the application of an 8% net profit rate on gross turnover by the CIT(A), arguing that the assessee had furnished duly audited accounts and produced complete books of account and vouchers. The AO initially applied a 10% net profit rate based on a judgment by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of M/s. Shivam Construction Co. The CIT(A) reduced this rate to 8%, relying on a precedent where the ITAT Bench Amritsar upheld a 7% net profit rate for civil and road construction contractors. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not identify any specific defects in the books of accounts and failed to consider the assessee's past performance, which showed an average net profit rate of 3.89%. The Tribunal concluded that a 6% net profit rate on gross receipts would be reasonable, considering the past trading results and the nature of the business. Thus, ground no. 1 was partly allowed. Issue 2: Rejection of Book Results The AO rejected the book results under Section 145(3) of the Act, estimating the income based on a higher net profit rate without pointing out material defects in the books of accounts. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO must exercise this power prudently and not act arbitrarily. The Tribunal cited precedents, including the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in Gotan Lime Khanij Udhyog and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Siamon Carves Ltd., to highlight that the AO must act fairly and not in a partial manner. The Tribunal found that the AO ignored the past history and comparable cases, leading to an unjustified estimation of income. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the application of a 6% net profit rate, finding it more reasonable and just. Issue 3: Addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The AO made an addition of Rs. 5,72,590/- under Section 68 on account of wages payable, arguing that the assessee could not establish the identity of the parties and the genuineness of the transactions. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition. The assessee argued that the addition was based on presumptions, as the trading results and the wages debited to the P&L account were accepted. The Tribunal noted that Section 68 is a deeming provision applicable when there is a credit entry in the books of accounts without a satisfactory explanation. The Tribunal found that the AO had accepted the trading results, and the wages were a liability payable, not monies received. Citing judgments from ITAT Jodhpur in ITO Vs Ashok Transport Co. and ITAT Delhi in Sanjay Sharma Vs. ACIT, the Tribunal held that Section 68 was wrongly invoked, as the liability represented wages payable, not unexplained cash credits. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 5,72,590/- was deleted. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed both appeals, modifying the net profit rate to 6% and deleting the addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the AO to act fairly and consider the assessee's past history and comparable cases before making estimations or additions. The order was pronounced in the open court on 26.09.2022.
|
