Tribunal allows cross-objections, deletes unrecorded sales, restricts 40(a)(ia) disallowance.

The Tribunal partly allowed the cross-objections filed by the assessee, directing the deletion of additions related to unrecorded sales and unaccounted purchases based on the CESTAT's order. The disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was restricted to 30% of the amount, and the disallowance of telephone expenses was upheld.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Adoption of unrecorded sales amount.
2. Application of gross profit (G.P.) rate on unrecorded sales.
3. Estimation of investment in unaccounted purchases.
4. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source.
5. Disallowance of telephone expenses.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Adoption of Unrecorded Sales Amount:
The assessee contested the amount of unrecorded sales adopted by the CIT(A) based on papers found during a search by the Central Excise Department. The CIT(A) adopted an amount of Rs. 1,42,40,278/- for AY 2010-11 and Rs. 1,54,22,078/- for AY 2011-12, whereas the assessee claimed the unaccounted sales were Rs. 92,89,856/- and Rs. 32,65,518/- respectively. The Tribunal noted that the basis for the charge of unaccounted sales, which was the order of the Central Excise Authorities, had been set aside by the CESTAT. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards gross profit on unrecorded sales and unaccounted purchases.

2. Application of Gross Profit (G.P.) Rate on Unrecorded Sales:
The CIT(A) applied a G.P. rate of 3.61% on the alleged unrecorded sales instead of the G.P. rate declared by the assessee (3.43% for AY 2010-11 and 2.25% for AY 2011-12). The Tribunal, considering the CESTAT's order, directed that the additions based on these G.P. rates be deleted.

3. Estimation of Investment in Unaccounted Purchases:
The CIT(A) estimated the investment in unaccounted purchases at Rs. 11,86,494/- for AY 2010-11 and Rs. 12,85,369/- for AY 2011-12, based on an average unaccounted sales cycle. The Tribunal found no basis for such assumptions and directed the deletion of these additions in light of the CESTAT's order.

4. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for Non-Deduction of Tax at Source:
The AO disallowed Rs. 9,400/- under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax on interest paid to an individual. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance. The Tribunal, referencing amendments made by the Finance Act, 2014, which reduced the disallowance to 30% of the amount for non-deduction of TDS, held that this amendment should be given retrospective effect. Thus, the disallowance was restricted to 30% of the amount.

5. Disallowance of Telephone Expenses:
The AO disallowed 10% of the telephone expenses, amounting to Rs. 16,745/- for AY 2010-11 and Rs. 5,768/- for AY 2011-12, citing personal use. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that personal use by the director could not be ruled out.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the cross-objections filed by the assessee, directing the deletion of additions related to unrecorded sales and unaccounted purchases based on the CESTAT's order. The disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was restricted to 30% of the amount, and the disallowance of telephone expenses was upheld.

---