2016 (2) TMI 1250 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Adjusts Ratios, Reduces Additions; Revenue Appeals Dismissed; Assessment Reopening Upheld

Anthony F.R. Madasser Prop M/s Navjeevan Enterprises Versus Income Tax Officer

Anthony F.R. Madasser Prop M/s Navjeevan Enterprises Versus Income Tax Officer - TMI Issues Involved:1. Rejection of books of accounts and estimation of gross profit.2. Legality of reopening assessment for AY 2008-09.3. Calculation of undisclosed gross profit.4. Claims of free distribution and discounts on books.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Rejection of Books of Accounts and Estimation of Gross Profit:The assessee contested the rejection of books of accounts and the estimation of gross profit by the AO. The AO observed that the gross profit declared by the assessee was significantly low compared to the industry standard, leading to the rejection of the books of accounts. The AO applied a gross profit rate of 42.86% on the cost of goods sold, asserting that the assessee did not maintain a quantity-wise register, which made it impossible to verify the sales. The CIT(A) upheld the rejection of books but reduced the gross profit rate to 38.23% based on the average discount received. The Tribunal found that the AO did not explicitly reject the books of accounts but relied on the figures provided by the assessee to calculate the cost of goods sold. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the income was not estimated but calculated based on the figures from the trading account submitted by the assessee.2. Legality of Reopening Assessment for AY 2008-09:The assessee argued that the reopening of the assessment for AY 2008-09 was void ab initio as no addition was made based on the reason for reopening. The AO reopened the assessment based on cash deposits in the bank account, which were not disclosed. However, the AO did not make a separate addition for these deposits, considering them covered in the trading addition. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's argument, stating that the AO mentioned the cash deposits and held them as unaccounted sales proceeds. Therefore, the reopening was justified, and the additional ground taken by the assessee was dismissed.3. Calculation of Undisclosed Gross Profit:The CIT(A) calculated the undisclosed gross profit by applying the highest gross profit ratio, which the Tribunal found to be incorrect. The Tribunal agreed with the method of calculating suppression in gross profit but disagreed with applying the highest percentage. The Tribunal recalculated the gross profit based on the average discount received on gross purchases, resulting in lower undisclosed gross profit figures for the assessment years in question. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s method but modified the orders to apply the correct gross profit ratios, leading to reduced additions for the assessee.4. Claims of Free Distribution and Discounts on Books:The assessee claimed that part of the low gross profit was due to free distribution of books and discounts given to poor students and teachers. The AO did not allow this benefit, but the CIT(A) accepted the claim after obtaining remand reports and verifying the details. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the AO did not raise any objections during the remand proceedings. The CIT(A) rightly allowed relief to the assessee for the free distribution of books and discounts.Conclusion:The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee, modifying the CIT(A)'s orders to apply the correct gross profit ratios, resulting in reduced additions. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed, upholding the relief granted by the CIT(A) for the free distribution of books and discounts. The Tribunal confirmed the legality of reopening the assessment for AY 2008-09 and found that the income was calculated based on the figures provided by the assessee, not merely estimated.