Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (8) TMI 374 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition made by AO due to rejection of books of account under Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Entitlement of the assessee to claim depreciation at 60% on survey equipment.

Summary:

Issue 1: Deletion of Addition Made by AO due to Rejection of Books of Account under Section 145(3)
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, which deleted the addition of Rs. 6,05,99,475/- made by the AO by rejecting the books of account under Section 145(3). The AO had added this amount on the grounds that the assessee failed to produce books of accounts, bills, and vouchers related to foreign projects, thereby questioning the accuracy of the balance sheet. The CIT(A) held that the AO erred by applying a GP rate of 10% without rejecting the trading results under Section 145(3). The CIT(A) noted that the assessee maintained accounts on a mercantile system, verified by a Chartered Accountant, and that the AO had not pointed out any defects in the books of accounts. The CIT(A) relied on the Delhi High Court's decision in B.K. Khanna & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, which stated that addition without rejecting trading results under Section 145(3) is not warranted.

Issue 2: Entitlement to Claim Depreciation at 60% on Survey Equipment
The CIT(A) directed the AO to allow depreciation at 60% on survey equipment, treating them as computer accessories and peripherals integral to computer systems, based on the decision in CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. The AO had initially allowed only 15% depreciation. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the assessee is entitled to the prescribed rate of depreciation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to produce the required books of account, bills, and vouchers for foreign projects, making it impossible for the AO to ascertain the correct trading results. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition was not justified. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the depreciation rate. The Tribunal directed the AO to estimate the income at 10% and grant the applicable depreciation rate, thereby partly allowing the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates