Facts of the Case
A search and seizure operation was conducted at the premises
of the assessee firm, M/s Kesarwani & Co. During assessment proceedings
under Section 143(3), the Assessing Officer (AO) made multiple additions based
on alleged discrepancies found in seized material and registers, including:
- Suppressed
sales of ₹87,94,292
- Unaccounted
purchases of ₹2,66,73,629
- Diesel
expenses disallowance
- Unexplained
expenditure through a “Deshawar” account
- Various
ad-hoc disallowances of business expenses
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] substantially reduced or deleted these additions. Both the Revenue and the assessee filed cross appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Allahabad.
Issues Involved
- Whether
alleged suppressed sales could be added when the assessee’s audited books
showed higher sales and profit.
- Whether
purchases treated as unaccounted could be added despite being recorded in
computerized accounts and supported by quantitative details.
- Whether
diesel expenses and other business expenses could be disallowed in absence
of complete supporting documents.
- Whether
withdrawals through the “Deshawar account” constituted unexplained
expenditure.
- Whether partial rejection of books under Section 145(3) was justified.
Petitioner’s (Assessee’s) Arguments
- The
AO’s trading account was based on unidentified or unreliable seized
material.
- Audited
books reflected higher sales, purchases, and profit than those computed by
the AO.
- The
AO compared figures for unequal periods, leading to artificial
discrepancies.
- Purchases
alleged as unaccounted were duly recorded in computerized books, whose
backup was seized during search.
- Mismatch
in invoices was due to different types of invoices (tax vs. excise) for
the same transactions.
- Diesel
expenses were genuine business expenses for vehicles used in operations.
- The
Deshawar account represented a long-standing business practice for
operational cash management, not undisclosed income.
- Ad-hoc disallowances were arbitrary and unsupported by evidence.
Respondent’s (Revenue’s) Arguments
- Additions
were based on material seized during search operations.
- Discrepancies
between registers, invoices, and books indicated suppression of sales and
bogus purchases.
- Absence
of logbooks and proper vouchers justified disallowance of diesel expenses.
- The
Deshawar account reflected unexplained withdrawals and potential diversion
of funds.
- Estimated
disallowances were reasonable given incomplete documentation.
Court’s Order / Findings (ITAT Allahabad)
1. Suppressed Sales — Major Addition Deleted
- The
AO failed to identify the specific seized material forming the basis of
computation.
- Audited
books showed higher sales, purchases, and profit than the AO’s figures.
- Comparison
of different accounting periods rendered the calculation unreliable.
- Therefore,
the allegation of suppressed sales was not substantiated.
However, due to unexplained discrepancies in a branch’s
accounts, the CIT(A)’s limited addition of ₹1,00,000 after invoking Section
145(3) was upheld.
Important Clarification by the Tribunal
- Additions
in search assessments must be supported by identifiable and reliable
evidence.
- Audited
books, computerized records, quantitative details, and banking
transactions carry significant evidentiary value.
- Manual
registers alone cannot override comprehensive accounting records.
- Rejection
of books under Section 145(3) must be limited to demonstrable defects.
- Ad-hoc
additions cannot be made merely on suspicion or conjecture.
Final Outcome
- Revenue’s
appeals largely dismissed.
- Assessee
obtained substantial relief.
- Only
nominal additions (such as ₹1,00,000 for discrepancies and limited expense
disallowances) were sustained.
- Major
additions for suppressed sales, unaccounted purchases, and unexplained
expenditure were deleted.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1771063659_AgriculturalTechnologyManagementAgency922026115845684.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment