9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at arises for consideration in this appeal is with regard to the figure of 3.46% of the purchases which has been shown as a reconciliation difference by the assessee. According to the assessee/ respondent, the said 3.46% of the purchases in respect of the assessment year 2005-06, is merely reflective of the normal wastage, which includes loss in transit. According to the assessee/ respondent, this figure of 3.46% does not include any gas in the pipeline. 2. The learned counsel for the revenue contended that a similar issue had arisen in respect of the earlier years, namely, assessment years 2002-03 to 2004-05. In those years, the Tribunal, by virtue of the order in respect of the assessment year 2002-03 in ITA 989/Del/2006 dated 25.07.2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 23.08.2011. 5. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under:- "2.1 In reply, the ld. counsel referred to the finding of the Tribunal in its case for assessment year 2002-03. In this order, it has been mentioned that the reconciliation difference as percentage of purchases varies between 4.01% to 4.47% in assessment years 2000-01 to 2004-05, which is an information based on balance-sheet of the assessee. The percentage of loss which works out to be 4% of the purchases during the year under consideration appears to be reasonable, subject to verification. The intent of these observations was to find out the percentage of loss and evaluate it against acceptable loss of 4%. This has not been done. In fact, in this year th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed." 6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we feel that the entire controversy that has raged on for several years is with regard to the issue of including gas in the pipeline in the closing stock. According to the revenue, gas in the pipeline ought to have been included in the closing stock and ought not to have been shown as a reconciliation difference or as part of loss / wastage. 7. Mr Syali, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee/ respondent points out that whatever may have been the position in the earlier years, in the present year, which pertains to the assessment year 2005-06, gas in the pipeline has already been included in the closing stock ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
