LAWS(CHH)-2009-7-43

PEST-O-KILL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Decided On July 03, 2009
PEST-O-KILL Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against the order (Annex. Al) of Tribunal on the following substantial questions of law:

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, facts of the case are that the appellant/assessee filed return showing total income of Rs. 7,675 along with photocopy of the audited account as per Section 44AB of the Act including balance sheet, contract and P&L a/c. The case was taken up for scrutiny after approval of Commissioner (Appeals) (for brevity "Commissioner (Appeals)") and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was served. Again notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with queries calling for certain clarifications in connection with scrutiny, was served. A show-cause notice was served requiring the assessee to show as to why assessment may not be completed ex parte on his failure to reply to the queries. Though a written reply was filed by the assessee, but books of account, bills and vouchers were not produced. Several opportunities were given to the assessee. Ultimately, ex parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act was made on the basis of record. The appellant/assessee had shown a receipt of Rs. 38,75,298 for the relevant assessment year and he had shown percentage of profit at 7.12 per cent as against the profit shown at 8.02 per cent and 8 per cent in the previous two years respectively. From the documents, it was also observed -that the assessee had shown gross contract receipt of Rs. 41,73,137 as per TDS certificate enclosed with the return. However, in the return he had shown gross receipt from Balco at Rs. 38,75,298. Thus, the difference in the gross receipt of Rs. 2,97,839 was treated as income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. A penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) was also initiated.

(3.) ON second appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal by the impugned order.