1975 (11) TMI 60 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee wins appeals, deductions allowed for shortages, discrepancies, and set-off losses

Andhra Oils & Fertilisers Company. Versus Income Tax Officer.

Andhra Oils & Fertilisers Company. Versus Income Tax Officer. - TTJ 001, 137, Issues Involved:1. Addition towards excessive shortage in the yield of oil and deoiled bran and on account of shortage in export of bran.2. Discrepancy in purchases of bran.3. Estimate of gross profit.4. Losses from speculation business.Detailed Analysis:1. Addition towards excessive shortage in the yield of oil and deoiled bran and on account of shortage in export of bran:The assessee firm, engaged in the manufacture and sale of rice-bran oil and deoiled bran, faced scrutiny for excessive shortages in yield and export of bran for the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, and 1971-72. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) observed excessive shortages without satisfactory explanations, leading to additions in the assessee's income. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) allowed a 1% shortage in yield and exports for the first two years but confirmed the ITO's additions for the other years. The Tribunal, however, found that the assessee's records were consistent and credible, noting that variations in yield were normal due to the quality of bran and seasonal conditions. The Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for estimating the yield or disallowing the shortage in the manufacturing process for any of the years under consideration.2. Discrepancy in purchases of bran:For the assessment year 1966-67, the ITO noticed a discrepancy of 1,440 bags of bran, valued at Rs. 10,800, in the purchases recorded. The AAC was not fully convinced of the ITO's findings but still upheld the addition. The Tribunal, however, found that the discrepancy was due to an accounting error and that the revised figures provided by the assessee were correct. Consequently, the Tribunal held that no addition was warranted for the assessment year 1966-67 on account of the discrepancy in purchases.3. Estimate of gross profit:For the assessment year 1965-66, the ITO added Rs. 14,438 to the assessee's income based on an estimated gross profit. The AAC did not disturb this addition. The Tribunal, however, found that the ITO had not identified any defects in the assessee's books of account that justified rejecting the book results. The Tribunal noted that the overall gross profit disclosed by the assessee was reasonable and consistent with previous years. Therefore, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 14,438.4. Losses from speculation business:For the assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68, and 1971-72, the ITO classified losses incurred by the assessee due to payment of rate differences for non-fulfillment of contracts as losses from speculative business, disallowing their set-off against regular business income. The AAC confirmed this view. The Tribunal, however, found that the payments were made due to breach of contract and not as speculative transactions. The Tribunal referred to various High Court decisions and a circular from the Central Board of Revenue, concluding that the losses were part of the assessee's regular business activities and should be allowed as such. The Tribunal directed the set-off of these losses against the assessee's regular business income.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals, deleting the additions related to shortages, discrepancies in purchases, and estimated gross profit. It also allowed the set-off of losses from non-fulfillment of contracts against regular business income. The Department's cross-objection for the assessment year 1965-66 was dismissed as it was not raised at the earlier stages of the proceedings.