9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 1-3-2011 - MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Present: Mr. Denesh Goel, Advocate for the appellant. A DARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral) . 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 16.7.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandgiarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh in ITA No.724/Chd/2009, for the assessment year 2006-07, claiming following substantial question of law:- i). Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was legally justified in dismissing the appeal of the department by placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been accepted by the A.O. The A.O. is of the view that in view of the specific verification in the bank stock statements which are duly signed by the appellant the ratio of these decisions would not apply. As per him, the case laws relied upon by the appellant were distinguishable mainly owing to the fact that such verification did not appear to have been considered by the Hon'ble High Courts. However, I do not agree with the A.O. in this regard. It cannot be presumed that the Hon'ble High Court have not considered certain aspect of the case to come to the conclusion in a particular case. In the case of Sidhu Rice General Mills which has been relied upon by the ld. Counsel the Hon'ble High Court had taken note of the fact that the credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that the GP rate shown by the appellant in the assessment year under consideration is 15.43% is better than the GP rate of 15.14% shown in the preceding year would further go in favour of the appellant in as much as there is no ground for presuming that the appellant had understated its income by showing lower value of closing stock etc. Though the A.O. has placed reliance upon certain decision in making the impugned addition, as the case of the appellant is covered by the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Sidhu Rice General Mills (supra), the ratio of the decisions cited by the A.O. would not help his case. Keeping in view the facts circumstances discussed above and part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
