SHRI MITHILESH KUMAR SONI, Raisen V. THE ITO, Vidisha

ITA 439/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5827 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts

Judgement Text

MITHILESH KUMAR SONI ITA NO. 439/IND/2015 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.C. MEENA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 439/IND/2015 A.Y.2009-10 MITHLESH KUMAR SONI RAISEN ::: APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER VIDISHA ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI SUMIT NEMA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 21 .12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 . 2 . 201 6 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), BHOPAL-2, DATED 24.3 .2015. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE TRADING OF GRAINS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S MITHLESH KUMAR MANOJ MITHILESH KUMAR SONI ITA NO. 439/IND/2015 2 KUMAR. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS REGAR DING REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY INVOKING PROVISION S OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT AND ESTIMATING THE GROSS PR OFIT @ 3.10% AND MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,69,776/-. 3. BEFORE ME, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALTHOUGH THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RECORDE D THAT ON VARIOUS DATES THE ASSESSEE MADE PURCHASES IN CASH WHEN SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE CASH BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE INSTANCE LIKE THIS I.E. ON 13.4.2008. THEREFORE, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATING THE NET PROFIT RATE. HE SUBMITTED THAT AT T HE LAST THE ADDITION OF THE EXCESS PURCHASES OVER THE CASH AVAILABLE ON A PARTICULAR DATE MAY BE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. FOR THE SAME, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT HAVING ANY OBJECTION. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. MITHILESH KUMAR SONI ITA NO. 439/IND/2015 3 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. EXCEPT ON 13.4.2008 NO OTHER DEFICIT IN CASH BALANCE HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY T HE AUTHORITIES BELOW. FURTHER THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ONLY APPLIED THE GROSS PROFIT RATE BUT THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN REJECTED. THEREFORE, CONSIDERIN G ALL THESE ASPECTS, I DIRECT TO MAKE THE ADDITION ONLY TO T HE EXTENT OF CASH DEFICIENCY AS ON 13.4.2008. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL STANDS PARTLY ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 2 ND FEB., 2016 SD/- (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 2/2/2016 DN/-