2015 (11) TMI 1625 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal affirms 8% net profit rate for business income, rejects AO's additions

Income-tax Officer, Wd-52 (4), Kolkata. Versus M/s. Akash Developers

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to estimate business income at an 8% net profit rate, rejecting AO's additions on advances, sales, and expenses ... N.P. determination - rejection of books of accounts - Held that:- We find that there are errors/inconsistencies in the maintenance of books of account because in several cases for the relevant AY booking of sales does not tally with the year of registration. Even the method of recognition of sale adopted by the assessee is inconsistent, defective and not in accordance with any recognized system of accounting. Even before the AO or before the CIT(A), the assessee could not explain the basis of booking of various construction expenses in respect of flats kept in stock in trade. In view of these differences, we find that the CIT(A) has rightly rejected the books of account by applying the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act and we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in applying profit rate of 8%. Disallowance of expenses by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- In reply to other additions, it is clear that once net profit rate is applied, the expenses or other disallowances, since relating to business, cannot be made separately because the profit element of expenses or disallowances have already been considered while applying profit rate. Accordingly, we confirm the order of CIT(A). Appeal of revenue is dismissed. Issues involved:Estimation of net profit rate, additions made by AO on advances and sales, disallowance of expenses under section 40(a)(ia)Estimation of Net Profit Rate:The appeal by revenue challenged the order of CIT(A) estimating the net profit rate at 8% instead of the additions made by the AO on advances, sales, and disallowance of expenses under section 40(a)(ia). The CIT(A) rejected the books of account of the assessee under section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to discrepancies in maintaining accounts. The CIT(A) directed the AO to work out the net profit rate at 8% to arrive at a reasonable estimate of income, considering the unreliable accounting system of the appellant. The CIT(A) emphasized that applying a net profit rate eliminates the need for further disallowances of expenditures on technical grounds. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the inconsistencies in the maintenance of books of account justified the rejection under section 145(3) and confirmed the application of an 8% net profit rate.Additions on Advances and Sales:The AO had made various additions to the assessee's income, including undisclosed sales, bogus purchases, and disallowed expenditures under section 40(a)(ia). The CIT(A) noted that the assessee maintained accounts on a cash basis, which led to discrepancies in recording transactions. The CIT(A) rejected the books of account and directed the AO to estimate the business income at an 8% net profit rate, considering the discrepancies in recording sales and expenses. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that once the net profit rate is applied, separate disallowances of expenses are not warranted as the profit element of expenses is already considered.Disallowance of Expenses under Section 40(a)(ia):The AO had disallowed expenses under section 40(a)(ia) based on certain irregularities in the assessee's accounts. The CIT(A) directed the AO to estimate the business income at an 8% net profit rate, which covered all other additions made for bogus purchases and disallowable expenses. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that once the net profit rate is applied, separate disallowances of expenses are not required, as the profit element of expenses has already been considered. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue, confirming the CIT(A)'s order.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to estimate the business income at an 8% net profit rate, rejecting the additions made by the AO on advances, sales, and disallowance of expenses under section 40(a)(ia). The Tribunal emphasized that applying a net profit rate eliminates the need for separate disallowances of expenses, as the profit element is already considered, and confirmed the dismissal of the revenue's appeal.