2015 (6) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the ld. AR of the assessee has not pressed the Ground No. 1. Therefore, the same is dismissed being not pressed. 3.1 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a civil contractor, proprietor of M/s. Raj & Co., Ranjeet Nagar, Bharatpur. The AO observed that as against the total contract receipts of Rs. 1,64,02,406/- assessee has declared 3% of net profit rate which was lower as compared to net profit rate of 4.46%. The assessee was asked to produce the books of account with supporting bills & vouchers, stock register, quality and quantity-wise details of opening and closing stock and day to day consumption of materials which were not produced. Besides AO found that day to day record of consumed material and payment of labour had not been maintained, complete bills and vouchers in respect of expenses and purchases were not produced. The AO was of the view that from the records produced by the assessee, it was not possible to work out the correct taxable profit and therefore, books of accounts were rejected u/s 145 of the Act. AO held that net profit rate shown by the assessee @ 3% was inadequate and estimated net profit rate of 8%. 3.2 Aggrieved, the assessee preferred f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessment year 2009-10 by the ld. AO is fully unjust and bad in law. Reliance was placed on:- (i) DCIT vs. Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. (1998), 22 TW 155. (ii) Smt. P.K. Jain vs. ITO (1999), 22 TW 498 (iii) Ajanta Construction (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (1999) 22 TW 606 (iv) Ramidas Modi vs. DCIT (1999) 22 TW 501. (v) Sona Textile (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (1997) 20 TW 82. 3.4 The ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal by upholding the rejection of books of account and reduced estimation of net profit rate at 7% subject to depreciation and interest by following observations. "5.3 I have gone through the assessment order as well as submissions made by the A.R. I find that the AO has rejected the book results and has applied the provisions of Section 145 of the Act for the following reasons:- (i) Day to day records of material consumed have not been maintained. (ii) Day to day records of payment made to labour has not been maintained. (iii) Complete bills/ vouchers in respect of expenses/purchases claimed in the return of income have not been produced for verification. (iv) Some of the expenses have been claimed on the basis of self made vouchers and h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rest at 7% for A.Y. 2009-10. Accordingly, the net profit after depreciation of Rs. 137689/- and interest of Rs. 12930/- is worked out at Rs. 997550/- and addition is worked out at Rs. 505397/- (Rs. 997550 - 492153). Accordingly, the addition made by the AO is upheld at Rs. 505397/- and the appellant will get a relief of Rs. 314642/-. The Ground No. 3 is partly allowed and Ground No. 4 is allowed." 3.5 Aggrieved, the assessee is before us. 3.6 Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the facts that in the year in question it is not in disputed that the turnover of the assessee has increased by 2.18 times as compared to preceding year. No worthwhile defects have been pointed out in the books of account so as to justify the rejection of books of account u/s 145(3) of the Act, consequently rejection of books of account is unjustified and arbitrary. The books of account being properly written deserve to be upheld. The assessee has also filed the written submission to the following effect. "1. Para 1 - "Documentary evidences of contract expenses of Rs. 1,48,25,466/- are being furnished for your kind verification. Similarly proof of all other expenses viz. Salaries & Allowance,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and report filed by the AO dated 16-07-2012 commenting as under:- Ld. DR contends that ld. CIT(A) has been very considerate while allowing interest and depreciation from 7% estimated net profit; order of the ld. CIT(A) is relied on. 3.8 The ld. Counsel for the assessee in reply contends that the assessee has also filed the reply on 14-08-2012 to this remand report dated 16-07-2012 which is placed in the paper book filed by the assessee. 3.9 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the assessee's explanation and reply of the remand report, listed above five defects to be present in assessee's books of account which made the determination of proper taxable profits not possible in terms of sec. 145(3). In this contention, the ld. Counsel for the assessee could not effectively demonstrate that these deficiencies in the books and stock register had no relevance. We find merit in the arguments of ld. DR that it is incomprehensible that such a voluminous and diverse business can be profitably conducted by assessee without proper record and stock registers. In consideration of all these findings, ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....के दौरान हाथ से बनाये गये थे तथा निर्धारिती का कोई माल खाता रजिस्टर तैयार नहीं किया हुआ था निर्धारिती के विद्वान सी ए श्री राजेन्द्र अग्रवाल ने भी आपने जवाब से स्वीकार किया है कि दिन प्रतिदिन मालखाता तैयार करना सम्भव नही हैं इससे ....