C.I.T. UDAIPUR vs. AMOL AGARWAL

[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.59/2014 Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur Versus Shri Amol Agarwal Date of Judgment :: 13.04.2016 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. K.K. Bissa, with Mr. Gajendra Singh Chouhan, for the appellant BY THE COURT : This appeal is preferred to question correctness of the judgment impugned dated 25.09.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Income Tax Appeal No.391/Jodh./2013 for the assessment year 2009-2010. In brief, facts of the case are that the assessing officer under the order dated 23.12.2011 rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee being not satisfied as per the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The justification taken by the assessing officer was affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The order passed by the assessing officer as well as the [2] Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was subject-matter of an appeal preferred before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and that came to be accepted under the judgment impugned. Learned Tribunal while accepting the appeal arrived at the conclusion that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) while upholding the rejection of books of accounts under Section 145 (3) of the Act of 1961 is not justified as the assessment order itself mentions that the assessee produced books of accounts alongwith supporting vouchers. The Tribunal further noticed that the assessing officer had not pointed out any specific defects in the books of accounts or vouchers produced by the assessee on day to day basis in regular course of business. In appeal, the only argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that mere production of books of accounts is not sufficient. It was required to satisfy the assessing officer about all the details extended in the case in hand. As per learned counsel, the assessee though tendered the books of accounts, but did not support the same with adequate material to get the assessing officer satisfied. We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal after examining the entire record arrived at a definite conclusion that the books of accounts produced by the assessee were adequately

[3] supported by the vouchers and the assessing officer did not point out any specific defect in the books of accounts and the vouchers submitted in support thereof. In view of it, we are of the considered opinion that this appeal does not involve any substantial question of law required to be adjudicated by this court.

The appeal is dismissed, accordingly. [KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA],J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J. Pramod