9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mated a separate addition arising out of that books of account cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Judicial Member And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. Deepak Vyas, C.A. For the Respondent : Sh. A.S. Nehra, Sr. DR ORDER PER BENCH: These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue. The same is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bikaner dated 20.03.2018 [here in after ld.CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2014-15, which in turn arise from the order dated 29.11.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here in after Act ) by the AO. Since common issues are involved, both the appeals were heard together and are disposed off by this common order. 3.1 Brief facts of this case is that the return in this case was filed on 30.10.2014 declaring a total income of Rs. 46,98,060/-The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of contractor ship as per audit report filed by the assessee online e-filing portal. The case was selected for limited scrutiny by CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.08.2015 which was duly served. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the due date of filing of the return as per section 43B has been provided by the assessee. In fact, no details of even the nature of these liabilities and provisions has been provided by the assessee. This detail was seen to be forming a part of the balance sheet and was mandatorily required to be uploaded by the assessee online but has not been uploaded. The substantiating proof of the same was also required to be produced along with books of accounts as called for in the notice u/s 142(1) which has not been done by the assessee. The above amount is hence disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. 3.4 The assessee has shown creditors to the tune of Rs. 1,86,79,561/- in its balance sheet. The ld. AO made an attempt to verify the same. The assessee was required to submit the proof of same along with the balance sheet. No mention of any address, PAN no. contact number of the entity is present, hence the identity of the entities cannot be ascertained. The ld. AO then made an attempt to download the balance sheet of the previous year which the assessee is mandated to upload compulsorily online on the e-filing portal. It is seen that the creditors in the AV 2013-14 amounted to Rs. 35,89,082/-, In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that the appellant's own results in the preceding assessment years are the best guide in the matter of adoption of a particular GP rate. In the instant case, it is observed that the business of the appellant remained the same and it was carried in the same manner and fashion and there was no change. Therefore, the results of the preceding assessment year are the best guide in the matter of application of a particular GP or NP rate. 6.2.1. The Hon'ble ITAT, Jodhpur Bench in its decision in the case of RambilasMadhour Lab Co. Vs. CIT - reported in STO 61 held that past history of the case is the best guide to determine reasonableness of GP rate. Similar decision has been reported in the case of Sangrur Vanaspati Mills Limited Vs. ACIT reported in 133 Taxman 37. The Hon'ble ITAT, Indore Bench in its decision in the case of Badshah Construction Co. Vs. DCIT reported in 127 Taxman 153-held that results of the previous years are the best available example for comparison to arrive at a particular rate of profit. Similarly, in the decision in the case of Action Electricals Vs. DCIT - reported in 258 ITR 188 it has been held that estimation of GP rate based on past results ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of other liabilities and provisions. The AO noted that the assessee had shown provision of Rs. 41,87,052/- in lieu of 'Other liabilities and Provisions . No proof of payment of these amounts before the due date of filing of return as per provisions of sec. 43B was furnished by the assessee before the AO The AO also mentioned that no details of nature of these liabilities and provisions were provided by the assessee. Accordingly, the AO made the addition of Rs. 41,87,052/- u/s. 68 treating it as unexplained cash credit. While doing so. the Assessing Officer stated that the nature of amount being any different than the amount pertaining to sec. 438. 8.1. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant furnished various evidences and details with regard to provisions of Rs. 41,87,052/-. Since it is fact that these details and evidences could not be filed before the Assessing Officer, therefore in the interest of natural justice, these evidences and details were sent to the Assessing Officer for his comments/report. The Assessing Officer vide report dated 26-02-2018 submitted that out of the total claim of provision of Rs. 41,87,052/-, Rs. 4172132/- has been verified and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3985 10 Omkara Filling Station 286988 11 National Motor Repairing Works 10500 12 M V Trader 228250 13 Kumawat Crane Service 70000 Total 16,39,926 9.2. The report of the AO was also provided to the appellant for rebuttal and in response, it was submitted that in the subsequent assessment year, no adverse view has been taken in respect of these unverifiable creditors by the Assessing Officer. 9.3. I have gone through the facts of the case, assessment order/remand report and appellant's submissions. Out of the total sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 1,86,79,561/-, the appellant has furnished details and evidences in respect of creditors to the tune of Rs. 1,70,39,635/- and its claim to that extent stand proved. However, in respect of remaining / balance amount sundry creditor of Rs. 16,39,926/-, it could not satisfactorily discharge its onus by bringing sufficient evidences on record. I have gone through the copy of assessment order passed in respect of AY 2015-16 and I find that there is no discussion regarding the issue of sundry creditors. Hence, it cannot be said that the appellant has explained these creditors in subsequent year. The fact is that these creditors pertained to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has justified in sustaining addition to the extent of Rs. 14,920/ only out of total addition of Rs. 41,87,052/ on account of other liabilities and provisions, as the assessee failed to provide any documents, of proof of payment of these amounts before the due date of filing of return as required u/s 43B. (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has justified in sustaining addition to the extent of Rs. 16,39,926/- out of total addition of Rs. 1,86,79,561/-made by the AO on account of sundry creditors. 6. First we taken up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 299/Jodh/2018, wherein the assessee hasprecisely two grounds [ ground no. 1 4 being general does not require any adjudication], one is in relation to the estimation profit @ 20% by the Ld. AO which the Ld. CIT(A) has reduced to the extent of 14% as against the profit declared by the assessee @ 8.13% in support of the ground and considering non compliance before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR of the assessee fairly admitted instead of 14% estimated by the Ld. CIT(A) if the estimation of 11% be made so as to give justice to the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
