9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered sale proceeds as income in the earlier year and therefore sum written off in this year is allowable as deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act - Decided in the favour of assessee Deduction u/s 40A(2)(b) - Held that:- CIT(A) has given categorical finding that there is no evidence on record to prove that excess payments were made, so as to invoke provisions of section 40A(2)(b). No evidence whatsoever was placed on record by DR to contradict the findings of CIT(A). in assessee's own case for the earlier years wherein on identical circumstances disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by invoking provisions of section 40A(2)(b) was deleted - Decided in the favour of assessee X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al components followed exclusive method in so far as the raw material, packing items etc. and accordingly unutilized modvat credit was not taken into consideration for the purpose of valuation of closing stock. It is not in dispute that in terms of section 145A of the Act, unutilized modvat balance has to be taken into consideration in which event value of the closing stock would increase to that extent. The Assessing Officer sought to make an addition of Rs. 4,69,459/- on the ground that the assessee has wrongly not taken into account unutilized modvat balance for valuing closing stock. 3. The assessee contended that if adjustments had to be made to the closing stock, in the same token value of purchase/sale of goods and inventory had to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observation that there is no change in the facts of the case in comparison with the facts of the assessment year 2005-06. In the said year learned CIT(A) observed that there is no impact on profit on account of adjustment of modvat credit, on an application of section 145A of the Act. This finding of learned CIT(A) was not controverted before us. Under the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by learned CIT(A) and therefore reject ground No. 1 of the revenue. 6. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had debited an amount of 45,66,774/- in the profit and loss account under the head 'debit/credit balance written off'. It was explained by the assessee that it h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive has not bothered to place on record any material to contradict the findings of learned CIT(A). In the light of the findings of learned CIT(A) that the assessee has already treated it as sale revenue in the year 2001-02, claim of deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii) of the Act is in accordance with law in the light of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd., (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC). Under the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A) and thus reject Ground No. 2 of the revenue. 10. Vide ground No. 3 the revenue contends that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 40A(2)(b) was wrongly deleted by learned CIT(A). It may be noticed that learned CIT(A) has given categorical finding tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
