9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be with the assessee at the close of the year at 7,265 bales and by applying @ Rs. 700 per metric ton added, Rs. 1,52,565 in the trading account for non-disclosure of bagasses in the closing stock. In appeal, ultimately, the Appellate Tribunal accepted that as per system of accounting followed by the assessee, the closing stock was shown at cost. The bagasses was a by-product produced by the assessee, and on direct cost basis, it did not cost to the assessee anything beyond Rs. 7,557, the figure which was duly disclosed in the closing stock. In above view of the matter, the Appellate Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 1,52,565. 2. The AO also disallowed Rs. 4,762 out of travelling expenses by applying provision of rule 6D of Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 89. This interest was worked out at Rs. 3,64,734. 5. On appeal, the Appellate Tribunal held that interest under section 220(2) could not be charged unless there was a default on the part of the assessee after service of notice under section 156 of the IT Act. No such notice was issued or served on the assessee in this case and therefore, the assessee could not be deemed to be a defaulter under section 220(2) of the I.T. Act. The levy of interest was accordingly cancelled. Some other small issues were also considered and disposed of by the Tribunal. 6. From and out of the aforesaid order, the revenue in the reference application filed on March 21, 1994, claimed the following question of law :--- "Whether, on the facts and in the circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue has filed a fresh reference application under the garb of "reframed questions" and the said reference application was out of time. Even the Tribunal did not have power to condone delay beyond period of 30 days. It was further submitted that earlier application filed with vague and non-specific issues was no reference application in the eye of law. It was accordingly prayed that reference application filed by revenue in original and with reframed questions be dismissed. 7. We have heard both the parties in this reference application. It is settled law that in a reference application the applicant has to state specific and precise questions of law which in his opinion arise out of the order of the Tribunal. A vague request to refer a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed along with the aforesaid reframed questions. The applicant did not give any reason as to why questions in the aforesaid form were not sought at the first instance and in the application filed on21-3-1994. No explanation whatsoever for aforesaid action was given in the covering letter nor any delay was sought to be condoned. Having regard to the question sought in application filed on21-3-1994and the four reframed questions, it is clear, that four questions cannot be treated as amended question. The alleged reframed questions are new questions sought to be raised for the first time in the application filed onJuly 21, 1994. Thus, reference application with alleged reframed question has to be treated as flied on the date mentioned above. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
