Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S ORIENTAL TEXTILES versus CIT

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/s Oriental Textiles v. CIT - INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 66 of 1984 [2004] RD-AH 435 (3 August 2004)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.37

Income Tax Reference No.66 of 1984

M/s. Oriental Textiles, Ghazipur v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad.

Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.

Hon'ble K.N.Ojha, J.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion  to this Court.

"1.     Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 145 or sub-section (2) of section 145 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 were attracted in the present case?

2.      Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax authorities as well as the Appellate Tribunal were justified in drawing adverse inference by the issue of the three post dated cheques in order to pacify the karigars on their pressing demand, the amount of which were actually paid to them and the certificates to that effect were filed?"

The present reference relates to the assessment year 1978-79 from the case of the assessment proceedings.

The Income Tax Officer found that the assessee who was following mercantile system of accounting and who did the business of purchase and export of wall hangings, declared sales of about Rs.15 lakhs, but the gross profit declared was negligible  (.01% only).  In the immediately preceding year, the gross profit was declared @ 13.4% on sales of about Rs.10,58,000/-.  On enquiry from the assessee the Income Tax Officer could know that, according to the assessee, the sales this year were made practically at cost price to avail of the cash incentives and to increase the turnover.  The Income Tax Officer also found that the sale rates were higher this year.  The explanation of the assessee was that purchase cost had also gone up.  The Income Tax Officer scrutinized the purchases and could know that the assessee had made payments to karigars amounting to Rs.75,000/- by three post dated cheques of Rs.25,000/- each.  These cheques were encashed either by the assessee's representative or by one of the partners of the assessee-firm.  He, therefore, added the amount of Rs.75,000/- in the assessment order mentioning that there was no stock register and that replies of the karigars who had confirmed the receipts, were identically worded, which showed that the reply was drafted by common source.  The Income Tax Officer held that the book results were not acceptable.  He added Rs.75,000/- to the income, as, according to him, the cost of the goods was inflated.

The assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).  The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) felt on the facts of the case that cash incentive received should be taken into account for deciding the reasonableness of the profits and that an over-all rate of profits of 12 ½ %would be a fair estimate.  On this basis, he sustained the addition of Rs.32,000/- and deleted the balance of Rs.43,000/-.

The assessee and the department both filed second appeals against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) before the Appellate Tribunal.  The Tribunal vide  order dated 18.9.1982 agreed with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed both the appeals of the assessee and of the department.

We have heard Sri K.M. Sahai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue.

Sri K.M. Sahai, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant was maintaining its books of account on mercantile system and, therefore, if three post dated cheques  have been entered into a particular date in the cash book it would not make any difference, therefore, provisos to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 145 of the Act were attracted.  

Sri Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that it is not in dispute that the applicant had issued three post dated cheques and had entered the same in cash book maintained by it on the date other than the date of cheques and, therefore, the Income Tax Officer had rightly held that the  result as shown by the books of accounts cannot be believed.  Thus the provisos to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 145 are clearly attracted in the present case.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the applicant no doubt is maintaining its books of accounts on mercantile system and further it has entered the payment to three ''karigars' by post dated cheques which were issued, not on the date of the cheque but on the date when these were handed over.  This entry was made in cash book which obviously was false and as payment is to be recorded when it is actually made even if it is either by way of cash or by way of cheque or draft.  In the present case as the applicant had made entries on date when the actual payment was not made, the payment having been made by post dated cheques,  books of account maintained by it was clearly unreliable and  therefore, the Income Tax Officer was justified in invoking the provisos to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 145 of the Act.

In view of  the foregoing discussion, we are of  the considered opinion that there is no illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal.  We answer both the questions referred to us in the affirmative i.e. in favour of Revenue and against the assessee.

3.8.2004

mt


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.