Itta/148/2013 Of Sai Gayatri Projects Pvt. Ltd v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JUNETWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.148 OF 2013 Between: Sai Gayatri Projects Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. ..... Appellant AND Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle –3 (1), Hyderabad. .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be admitted on the following suggested questions of law: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,the Tribunal was justified in estimating the income @50% of the gross receipts ignoring the past recordsand assessments in similar circumstances, estimating the income at 8% on gross receipts by theAssessing Officer himself? This appeal is preferred against the judgment andorder of the learned Tribunal dated 14.09.2012 in relation tothe assessment year 2007-2008. The assessee is carryingon the business in construction of buildings. The assesseeclaimed a deduction on account of management of localofficials and payment to politicians and also the expenditurealleged to have been incurred towards drilling and blastingcharges to the tune of Rs.1,28,14,820/-, labour and evictioncharges to the tune of Rs.2,05,50,000/-; oils and lubricantsto the tune of Rs.93,43,295/- and the expenditure incurredon account of eviction of illegal occupants. Admittedly nobooks of accounts have been maintained and no documentis produced showing such expenditure. In thecircumstances, the Assessing Officer disbelieved andconsequently disallowed the entire expenditure as businessexpenditure. Thereafter, the matter was taken in appealbefore the Tribunal and the learned Tribunal afterconsidering the facts and circumstances of the case and inexercise of the discretion, in the absence of books ofaccount, estimated the expenditure at 50%. Of the amountclaimed. The assessee did not produce any material of pasttransaction relating to the allowance claimed and not evencomparable instances. In the said circumstances, theTribunal has no option to estimate the alleged allowance and pass a rationale judgment. According to us, 50%allowance is rationale and justified in the circumstances ofthe case. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interferewith the judgment and order, as it does not involve anyquestion of law, as the case is based solely on facts. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. No order asto costs. ______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. June 28, 2013MAS __________ G.Rohini, J.