9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Delay in filing Cross Objections 2. Disallowance of deduction on account of wastage Analysis: 1. The judgment involved an appeal by the assessee and a Cross Objection by the revenue, both related to the delay in filing Cross Objections. The Income-tax Officer explained a 21-day delay due to a misunderstanding, which was condoned after perusal of the petition. 2. The assessee, a registered firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of beedies, contested an addition to income due to a change in gross profit rate by the Income-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed a deduction of Rs. 30,000 out of Rs. 35,000 claimed for tobacco wastage, considering its use as manure. The assessee sought the full deduction, while the revenue objected to the allowance. 3. The counsel for the assessee argued that the wastage was properly recorded in the E.B. 3 Register, subjected to scrutiny by Central Excise Authorities, justifying its allowance as a deduction. Relying on a previous Tribunal decision, the counsel contended that the entire claimed amount should be allowed as a deduction, regardless of its use as manure. 4. The Departmental Representative opposed the deduction, citing the lack of proper registers produced before the Income-tax Officer. However, the Tribunal held that the entire claimed amount of Rs. 35,000 should be allowed as a deduction, rejecting the reduction made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner based on the use of wastage as manure. 5. The Tribunal noted that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was justified in allowing the deduction based on the proper recording of wastage in the E.B. 3 Register, as per the earlier year's decision. Consequently, the assessee's appeal was allowed, and the revenue's Cross Objection was dismissed.
|
