2015 (1) TMI 508 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal adjusts profit rate on undisclosed receipts, emphasizes fair income estimation and dismisses Revenue's appeal.

M/s. Rameshwar Textile Mills Ltd. Versus JCIT, Range-4, Surat

The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee's appeal by adjusting the gross profit rate on the undisclosed receipts to 6.50%, emphasizing fair income ... Addition on account of undisclosed income from job receipts out side books - estimating G.P. of 10% on net additional turnover - Held that:- Assessing Officer has accepted the expenses shown in regular books as correct and only taken receipt from the data found in the laptop. The Assessing Officer has given absolutely no reason as to why only receipt was taken from the laptop data and why expenses appearing in laptop data were not taken into consideration. It is not the case of the Revenue that the data found in the laptop shows that the actual net income of the assessee was more by ₹ 4,20,73,972/- from the income disclosed in the return of income. It is an established position of law that even when the undisclosed sale or receipt is found, then also only the income embedded in such undisclosed receipt can only be brought to tax. The entire sales could not be added as income of the assessee but addition could be made only to the extent of estimated profits embedded in sales. In the above circumstances, we do not find any force in the appeal of the Revenue and accordingly, the same is dismissed. - Decided against revenue. CIT(A) while estimating the gross profit at 10% has not given any basis for the same, though he has referred to the gross profit rate of the assessee at 5.22% in Assessment Year 2006-07 and 4.85% in the present assessment year. Thus the highest rate of gross profit shown by the assessee in Assessment Year 2006-07 and accepted by the Department is 5.22% and in our considered view, keeping in view the gross profit rate disclosed in respect of recorded receipt at 4.85% which is lower than now admitted gross profit rate of 5.22% to take care of this it will be just and fair to estimate the gross profit of the unrecorded receipt @ 6.50%. Therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) to this extent and direct the Assessing Officer to accept the gross profit rate of the suppressed receipt of ₹ 4,20,73,972/- @ 6.50%. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Addition to the total income based on undisclosed income from job receipts.2. Rejection of books of accounts.3. Estimation of gross profit on additional turnover.4. Allowance of expenses against additional turnover.Detailed Analysis:1. Addition to the Total Income Based on Undisclosed Income from Job Receipts:The Assessing Officer (AO) found discrepancies in the accounts maintained by the assessee in a laptop, leading to a conclusion that the books of accounts were incorrect and doctored. The AO identified unaccounted job charges receipts amounting to Rs. 4,72,05,175/- and, after deducting estimated discounts, determined net unaccounted receipts at Rs. 4,20,73,972/-. The AO rejected the assessee's claim of additional expenses and added the entire amount to the total income. The CIT(A) observed that the AO did not have direct evidence to establish the precise amount of additional turnover and found contradictions in the figures from the impounded materials. The CIT(A) concluded that a fair estimate of the gross profit should be made based on past trends and prevailing rates in similar industries, and restricted the addition to 10% of the net unaccounted receipts, i.e., Rs. 42,07,397/-. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s approach but modified the gross profit rate to 6.50%, resulting in a partial allowance of the assessee's appeal.2. Rejection of Books of Accounts:The AO rejected the books of accounts on the grounds that they were incorrect and did not represent the true state of affairs of the assessee. The AO noted that the accounts found in the laptop showed suppressed process charges receipts and unaccounted transactions. The CIT(A) agreed with the AO's decision to reject the books of accounts but emphasized the need for a fair estimation of income based on available records and past trends. The Tribunal supported the rejection of the books but modified the estimation of gross profit.3. Estimation of Gross Profit on Additional Turnover:The AO added the entire net unaccounted receipts to the income, while the CIT(A) estimated the gross profit at 10% based on past trends and prevailing rates. The Tribunal found that the highest gross profit rate shown by the assessee in the past was 5.22% and accepted by the Department. The Tribunal modified the CIT(A)'s estimation and directed the AO to accept a gross profit rate of 6.50% on the suppressed receipts, resulting in a partial allowance of the assessee's appeal.4. Allowance of Expenses Against Additional Turnover:The AO rejected the assessee's claim of additional expenses on account of salary and other expenses, stating that the expenses appeared excessive and were not clearly accounted for. The CIT(A) observed that the existence of unaccounted income and expenses could not be ignored and that some expenses might have been incorporated in the regular books. The CIT(A) allowed a fair estimation of expenses but did not fully accept the assessee's claim. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s approach but modified the gross profit estimation, indirectly addressing the allowance of expenses.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's appeal by modifying the gross profit rate on the suppressed receipts to 6.50%. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fair estimation of income based on past trends and prevailing rates in similar industries, while considering the discrepancies and unaccounted transactions found in the impounded materials.