9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (5) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not maintain any regular books of accounts in respect of his truck business. In the past also, the assessee had been showing income from trucks on estimated basis, giving statements of incomings and outgoings only. Since the assessee did not maintain any regular books of accounts, the ITO applied provision s. 145 of the Act. 4. During the year, the assessee disclosed income from four trucks at Rs. 1,31,000, details whereof are as under: No. of truck Model Income shown Rs. URC 1173/MNP 1536 1979 31,000 UTR 8495/NLK 8247 1978 28,000 URC 6231/MNP 2480 1980 36,000 URC 6404 1980 36,000 1,31,000 5. The assessee showed income from each truck on the basis of its age. The ITO has noted in the asstt. order that this basis cannot be accepted as in the case of other partner, namely, Gulshan Lal, the same models have yielded higher income. Comparable cases also showed that the income disclosed by the assessee from trucks was on the lower side, even if the amount of Rs. 25,000 surrendered by the assessee was taken into consideration and which was nothing but income from truck plying business. 6. The ITO further noted in the asstt. order that during the asst. yr. 1981-82, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1981 Dec. 1981 NLK 8247 Rs. 9920 Rs. 7,550 MNP 1536 Rs. 10,420 Rs. 10,723 URC 6504 Rs. 11,700 Rs. 12,280 MNP 2480 Rs. 7,400 Rs. 16,064 Total Rs. 39,440 Rs. 45,617 10. On the basis of the above figures, average gross earning per month worked out to Rs. 42,500 from truck plying business. On this basis, gross receipts from four trucks would be about Rs. 5 lakhs for the whole of the year. The learned CIT(A) further came to the conclusion that net earning truck plying business would work out to Rs. 2.5 lakhs subject to depreciation and financing charges if 50 per cent of the gross receipts were taken to be the expenses incurred on petrol, salary, repairs, replacement of tyres and tubes, taxes and insurance etc. In view of these facts, the learned CIT(A) concluded that the addition of Rs. 30,000 on account of income from truck plying business was neither reasonable nor excessive. The addition was thus accordingly confirmed. 11. Shri K.P. Bhatnagar, the learned Authorised Representative submitted before us that the assessee estimated income from each truck on the basis of their age, and that the estimate of income as made by the assessee for the asstt. year under consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for 4 to 5 months in the asst. yr. 1981-82. As has been pointed out by the learned CIT(A), some of the note books seized during the search and seizure operation recorded gross receipts of the trucks plied by the assessee which indicated that the gross receipts for the four trucks for the months of November and December, 1981 on an average amounted to Rs. 42,500. On this basis, the gross receipts for the 12 months would be about Rs. 5 lakhs and if expenditure excluding financing charges and depreciation was taken at 50 per cent of the gross receipts, the net income from truck plying business would work out to Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The ITO has estimated the income from truck plying at Rs. 1.80 lakhs which included the surrendered amount of Rs. 25,000 and the addition of Rs. 30,000. This figure is considerably low as compared to the net income as estimated by the learned CIT(A) at Rs. 2.5 lakhs on the basis of the gross receipts for two months. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made on behalf of both the parties and the materials placed before us, we are of the opinion that the addition of Rs. 30,000 on account of income from truck plying b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred on the taxi for purchase of petrol and also for insurance etc. Thus, the note book contained entries regarding expenses for running the taxi. The learned CIT(A) in his impugned order gave some details of the expenses recorded in the note book relating to the expenses incurred on the taxi-car bearing No. URC 7288. Thus, the learned CIT(A) found from the documentary evidence available that the taxi was being run by the assessee who was meeting all the expenses including payment of instalments to the bank and also expenditure on the maintenance of the taxi. The learned CIT(A) also considered the statements of incomings and outgoings filed by the assessee before the ITO which showed outgoing of Rs. 13,000 with the description 'payment made to Ashok Kumar for purchase of car'. This statement was found to be wrong as in the statement of incomings and outgoings for the asst. yr. 1981-82, no loan was shown to have been given to Ashok Kumar although the taxi was purchased in the accounting year relevant to the asst. yr. 1981-82. The learned CIT(A) noted that if the assessee had really advanced loan to Ashok Kumar for the purchase of the car, it should have appeared in the statement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t income from taxi was not recorded in those documents. The learned Authorised Representative also drew our attention to the statement of Ashok Kumar recorded on the date of search wherein he stated that he did not own any vehicle. The learned Authorised Representative sought to explain this statement by pointing out that the car was purchased by the assessee from Ashok Kumar in March, 1983 though it was actually transferred in his name in August, 1984. So on the date on which Ashok Kumar's statement was recorded, he was not the owner of the taxi and for this reason he stated that he did not own any vehicle. In this connection, it was also stated that according to the statement of Ashok Kumar, the assessee also did not own any car or jeep which supported the version that before the transfer of the car to the assessee in March, 1983, he was not its owner. The learned Authorised Representative, however, submitted that the assessee was not examined by the ITO otherwise he would have explained the entire position. 21. The learned Departmental Representative on other hand fully supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) on the point. It was further submitted that Ashok Kumar wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent is untrue for the simple reason that on the date on which his statement was recorded, the taxi was in existence. It was owned either by one of the partners or by Ashok Kumar. So the statement made by Ashok Kumar that none of the partners of the firm own any vehicle or taxi is patently incorrect. It only betrays the anxiety on the part of the Ashok Kumar to conceal the factum relating to the existence of the taxi. From his statement it is not possible to infer that the taxi was owned by him. On the other hand, it appears from the statement that he was suppressing the truth. 23. The learned CIT(A) found from the seized papers that Gulshan Lal was the owner of truck No. MNP 3090 though it was registered in the name of Ashok Kumar who was admittedly not its owner. In view of the close relationship of Ashok Kumar with the assessee, it is not surprising that the assessee purchased the taxi in the name of Ashok Kumar though in reality it was not owned by Ashok Kumar. In his letter dt.18th July, 1982, addressed to the Asstt. Director of Inspection (Intell.), a copy whereof is placed at page 17 of the paper book. Ashok Kumar has stated that Rs. 40,208 were taken as loan from the UCO Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
