2015 (3) TMI 679 - AT - Income Tax

ITAT dismisses department's appeal, partly allows assessee's challenge, deletes addition for sales suppression.

The ITAT dismissed the department's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's challenge. The ITAT deleted the addition sustained by the CIT(A) as there was ... Reopening of assessment - suppression of sales - CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books of account and estimation of sales made by AO but redusing the quantum of addition to ₹ 3 lakhs as against ₹ 18,30,818 done by AO - Held that:- Only because assessee could not produce stock register, for whatever may be the reason, sales suppression cannot be inferred by adopting the value of stock at ₹ 55 per sft. when absolutely no defect or deficiency was found in the books of acocunt. Moreover, on perusal of the observations made by ld. CIT(A), it is evident that ld. CIT(A) on the basis of facts and materials on record was convinced that there is no basis for AO to presume sales suppression. That being the case, it would have been fair and reasonable on the part of ld. CIT(A) to delete the addition made by AO entirely instead of sustaining the amount of ₹ 3 lakhs. There being no evidence on record brought by AO to even remotely established the fact that assessee has indulged in sales suppression, even part of the addition made by AO cannot be sustained. Thus we delete the addition of ₹ 3 lakhs sustained by ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Department's appeal against the decision of CIT(A) in restricting the addition.2. Assessee's challenge to the validity of the proceeding initiated under section 147 and the quantum of addition sustained by CIT(A).Analysis:Issue 1: Department's AppealThe department's appeal was against the decision of the CIT(A) to restrict the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) to Rs. 3.00 lakhs instead of the initial amount of Rs. 18,30,818. The AO had increased the Gross Profit (GP) rate declared by the assessee from 11.69% to 15%, resulting in an additional amount being added to the income. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection of the books of account and the estimation of sales by the AO but reduced the quantum of addition to Rs. 3 lakhs. The CIT(A) based his decision on the valuation of closing stock and the absence of a stock register, following legal precedents that allow rejection of book results in certain circumstances. The department argued that if the CIT(A) agreed with the rejection of book results, the addition should not have been restricted to Rs. 3 lakhs.Issue 2: Assessee's ChallengeThe assessee challenged the validity of the proceeding initiated under section 147, contending that reopening the assessment after the expiry of four years without concrete evidence of income escapement was unjustified. The assessee argued that there was no tangible material before the AO to support the belief of income escapement. The assessee also disputed the sales suppression allegation, emphasizing that the absence of a stock register should not lead to presumptions of sales suppression. The assessee maintained that the AO's actions were arbitrary and lacked a factual basis. The ITAT concluded that there was no evidence of sales suppression and that the addition made by the AO could not be sustained. The ITAT also noted that the validity of the proceeding under section 147 was not challenged earlier and therefore did not require independent adjudication.In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the department's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's challenge. The ITAT deleted the addition sustained by the CIT(A) as there was no basis for presuming sales suppression. The ITAT did not delve into the validity of the proceeding under section 147 since it was not challenged earlier and the addition was already deleted on merit.This detailed analysis of the legal judgment highlights the key issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the final decision rendered by the ITAT.