TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 881X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntractors, however, as to what was stated by them or what material was produced by them has not been discussed at all. The court is of the considered view that the ITAT and the CIT(A) rather superficially examined the material and set aside the findings of the Assessing Officer. At the same time, the Assessing Officer’s order also is incomplete. In the peculiar circumstances, the matter is remitted to the CIT(A), who shall render fresh findings on the entire subject matter - ITA 314/2016, ITA 315/2016, ITA 316/2016, ITA 317/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2018 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. VINOD GOEL, JJ. For The Revenue : Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue with Mr. Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel For The Respondent : Mr. Balbir Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms.Rubal Maini, Mr. Rajesh Mahna, Mr.Achin Mittal, Mr.Vikram Kakkar, Advocates. Admit. 1. The common question of law urged by the Revenue in these four appeals is as follows:- Whether the lower Appellate Authority erred in setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer, who had rejected the Assessee s books of accounts for the AYs 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 2010-11 and applied the G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16.10.2015 5. The Commissioner of Appeals, who considered the Assessee s contentions was of the opinion that the Assessing Officer s rejection of the books was not justified. It was held that after considering the ratio of various judgments, the CIT(A) for the AY 2007-08 and 2008-09 held as follows: I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the important aspects which immerge from the present appeal are- 1. The Method of accounting has been accepted for several years on same set of facts. Reliance is placed on 294 ITR 655: [Gauhati] MKB [Asia) P. Ltd, v. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2. Non maintenance of stock register cannot be a ground for rejection of account in every case it depends upon the nature of business. 324 ITR 95 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 192 Taxman 167 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-Tax- XII v. Poonam Rani. 3. The onus was on revenue to show that accounts were incomplete or incorrect and true profits could not be deduced from the books of accounts maintained by the appellant which were also duly audited and no adverse inference was drawn by the auditor. If expenses claimed r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fy this. He stated that this refers to these details having been filed before the A.O. In the asstt. order, the AO. has observed that The assessee has not furnished site wise details of labour charges claimed in the profit loss account . The above statement of the appellant is therefore, factually incorrect and sitewise details of labour charges details have not been filed. In the asstt. order, the AO. has further stated that The entire claim of expenses is made in cash. All these payments are through self made vouchers. The claim of such expenses lacks third, parties verification. The assessee has not furnished for verification the labour musters to examine the genuineness of claims of such expenses. Considering the facts mentioned in the asstt. order, the appellant's arguments are not acceptable and the AO. had no alternative but to estimate the net profit. 13. The explanation given for the low N.P. rate is too vague and general. The rate of net profit estimated by the AO already takes these arguments into consideration. The estimate of income @5% of gross receipts of ₹ 19,93,27,702/- is justified considering the line of business and the facts of the case. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue were rejected and the appeals of the Assessee for the two Assessment Years were allowed. The Revenue relies upon the findings of the Assessing Officer and highlights that besides the absence of Stock Register, the respondent-Assessee did not produce any material evidence in the form of invoices, contracts with its various sub-contractors and suppliers, the proof of quantities involved, muster rolls, vouchers etc. relating to supplies and all connected details which would have justified its claims. 9. Learned Senior counsel for the Assessee on the other hand contested the Revenue s submissions and stated that ITAT s findings are justified. It was submitted that mere absence of Stock Register per se could not have resulted in the rejection of books of accounts, which were regularly maintained and had been the subject matter of previous assessments. It was contended, moreover, that the Assessing Officer had made inquiries by issuing notices under Section 131 and also conducted survey inquiries under Section 133 (6) by which various suppliers/sub-contractors were asked to appear in the proceedings. The Assessing Officer s order is absolutely silent on the justification or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
