Books of accounts cannot be rejected under section 145(3) based on mere financial analysis without identifying specific defects

ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal against rejection of books of accounts under section 145(3) and addition under section 68. The case involved cash deposits during demonetization period selected for scrutiny under CASS. AO rejected books citing anomalies in sales and cash figures compared to preceding year. ITAT held that AO cannot reject books based on mere financial analysis without identifying specific defects or discrepancies. Rejection requires patent, latent and glaring defects, not subjective assessment or conjectures. Since no actual defects were pointed out in book maintenance, rejection was improper and consequential additions were deleted.

---

---

Issues:
Rejection of books of accounts under Section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Validity of addition made under Section 68 of the Act for cash deposits in bank account.
Applicability of Section 115BBE of the Act.
Judicial review of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order.

Rejection of Books of Accounts:
The case involved an appeal by the assessee against the rejection of books of accounts by the Assessing Officer under Section 145(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer rejected the books of accounts based on anomalies in financial figures and abnormal increase in cash sales prior to demonetization. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the rejection. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Section 145(3) and emphasized that the rejection must be based on specific defects or discrepancies in the books. The Tribunal found that no concrete evidence or investigation supported the rejection, leading to the conclusion that the rejection was not in accordance with the law. Consequently, the rejection of books was set aside, and the ground of the assessee's appeal was allowed.

Validity of Addition under Section 68:
The addition made under Section 68 of the Act for cash deposits in the bank account was challenged by the assessee. Since the rejection of books of accounts was deemed incorrect, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the additions made under Section 68. All grounds raised by the assessee were allowed, resulting in the appeal being allowed in favor of the assessee.

Applicability of Section 115BBE:
One of the grounds raised by the assessee challenged the invocation of Section 115BBE of the Act. The Tribunal did not delve into this issue as the rejection of books of accounts and subsequent additions were found to be incorrect, rendering the applicability of Section 115BBE moot in this context.

Judicial Review of CIT(A) Order:
The Tribunal conducted a thorough analysis of the rejection of books of accounts by the Assessing Officer and subsequent affirmation by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Tribunal highlighted the necessity for concrete defects or discrepancies to justify rejection. The Tribunal's decision to set aside the rejection and delete the additions made showcased the importance of adherence to legal requirements in such matters. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed all grounds raised by the assessee and granted relief in favor of the assessee.

---