9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck operators. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO. To reiterate, no defects were pointed out by either of the Authorities below in the books of account maintained by the assessee. On the additional ground, the addition made by applying net profit rate on the gross receipts of the assessee is deleted. Accordingly, none of the original grounds raised survives for adjudication, having been rendered academic in nature. Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.577(Asr)/2013 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2016 - SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Sh. Ashwani Kalia, CA For the Respondent : Sh. S.S. Kanwal, DR ORDER This is the assessee s appeal for the assessment year 2009-10, against the order dated 14.06.2013, passed by the ld. CIT(A), Bathinda. The assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That the authorities below has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the books of account of the appellant without pointing out any defects in regular maintained and duly audited books of accounts of the appellant and applying the provision of section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ursement of Receipts amongst the Truck Operators /Members cannot be held as justified. As such, I reject the books of account as maintained by the assessee under section 145(3) of Income Tax Act and keeping in view of the judgment of Hon ble Income Tax Appellant Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar in the case of the Bathinda Truck Operator Union, Bathinda V/s The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Bathinda by applying Net Profit of 3% on the Gross Receipts. 6. The ld. CIT(A), upheld the AO s action, observing as under: In Ground No.1 7 of Appeal, it has been contended that the AO was not justified in reiecting the books of account and apply the provisions of section 145(3) of the IT Act, 1961. From the perusal of assessment order it is seen that the appellant had shown gross freight receipts at ₹ 3,02,89,681/- from various govt, agencies and private parties for transportation of goods and against such receipts, net profit of ₹ 13,130/- was disclosed. The AO in his assessment order has mentioned that the assessee did not produce all the vouchers for the expenses claimed in the income and expenditure account , nor any evidence has been led to establish the payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hers were produced and under such circumstances, the AO was fully justified in invoking the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act. The H ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Chetan Dass Lachhman Dass vs. CIT reported at 255 ITR 197 (Del.) has held that books of account could be rejected where there is no evidence in respect of claim of expenses. Accordingly, both the aforesaid grounds of appeal cannot be accepted and the action of the AO in rejecting the account books is hereby upheld. 7. The ld. counsel for the assessee has contended that the authorities below have wrongly rejected the assessee s books of account without pointing out any specific defects therein; that the books of account have erroneously been rejected on the ground that the assessee did not produce all the vouchers for the expenses incurred, nor any evidence was led to establish the payments made by the assessee Union to the Truck Operators. 8. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has placed strong reliance on the impugned order. 9. It is seen that that the Assessing Authorities have rejected the books of account for the reason that the assessee did not produce all the vouchers for the expenses, nor any e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 292,800.00 To Telephone Bills Expenses 11,724.00 To Power Fuel Expenses Electric Bills Expenses 41,629.00 Generator Expenses 3,390.00 45,019.00 To Jeep Expenses 88,484.00 To Fringe Benefit Tax 2,786.00 To Others Expenses Printing Stationary Expenses 15,141.00 News Paper Expenses 2,726.00 Tea Expenses 26,237.00 Bank Charges 32,027.00 Misc. Expenses 52,301.00 128,432.00 To Audit Fee 10,000.00 To Repair Charges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
