9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (9) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... According to the ITO the yield shown by the assessee was low. He found that the production register which the assessee had to maintain was not a proper production register as the entries in the register had been made not on actual weights but on estimated weights. The ITO, therefore, rejected the production account shown by the assessee and applied the provision of s. 145 of the IT Act, 1961. The ITO estimated the yield of hand coke at 66.66 per cent with reference to the total consumption of coal of 4119.82 MT. The estimate of the ITO showed that the assessee had further production of 193.198 MT. The ITO took the average sale rate of Rs. 135.10 per MT and estimated an extra income of Rs. 26,100. 3. On appeal before the AAC it was conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the assessee did not press ground No.1. Hence we reject ground No.1 as not pressed. 5. Now as regards the addition of Rs. 10,902 and the deletion of Rs. 15,198 in the trading account we find that the AAC had decided this issue following the order of this Tribunal dated 27th Sept., 1978 in ITA No.1603 (Pat) of 1977-78 relating to the asst. yr. 1974-75 in the case of the assessee, a copy of which has been field before this Tribunal. As the AAC has decided the appeal relating to the trading addition on the basis of the order of this Tribunal in ITA No. 1603 (Pat) of 1977-78, we hold that the AAC had taken a reasonable view in the matter and we, therefore, reject ground No. 1 of the Department and we also reject grounds 2 and 3 in the cros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has relied on the case of Addl. CIT Gujrjargravures P. Ltd. where their lordships of the Supreme Court have held that as neither was any claim made before the ITO regarding the relief under s. 84 nor was there any material on record in support thereof, and from the more fact that such a claim had been allowed in subsequent years it could not be assumed that the prescribed conditions justifying a claim for exemption under s. 84 were also fulfilled, the Tribunal was not competent to hold that the AAC should have entertained the question of relief under s. 84 or to direct the ITO to allow the relief and it has also been held in this ruling that merely because the ITO brings an item to tax he cannot be deemed to have considered its non-taxabil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
