9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e seen from the assessment year alone and it has to be seen from the subsequent years of taxation. As the CIT(A) has not given any finding on the ground raised by the assessee that there is no admission at all by the assessee for an ad-hoc estimated addition and as the AO has not provided any data collected by him to the assessee calling for its objection for making such an estimated addition, it is necessary to set aside the issue to CIT(A) for disposing of the issue afresh - in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 822/Mds/2011 - - - Dated:- 20-7-2012 - Shri N.S. Saini Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, JJ. Appellant by : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. Respondent by : Shri T.N. Betgeri, JCIT ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in not disposing the following ground namely "The learned Assessing Officer erred in mentioned the following lines in his order- The assessee has also admitted the difference in sale price of waste compared to the prevailing market price, an estimated addition of Rs. 88, 06, 811/ - is made and added to the total income", when factually, there were no such admission made by the appellant". e. Honourable Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no income earned by the appellant outside the books and consequently, erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer to tax the notional income, if any, on account of difference in sale price of waste cotton in the hands of the appellant f. Honoura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... va Textiles Ltd. c) To pass such other consequential order as the Honourable Income tax Appellate Tribunal may deem fit to render. 3. The counsel for the assessee specifically submits that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) did not dispose of ground No. 2(d) of the above grounds of appeal. The counsel submits that the Assessing Officer in the assessment order stated that the assessee admitted difference in sale price of cotton waste compared to the prevailing market price for an estimated addition of Rs..88,06,811/-. The counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee never agreed for such an estimated addition towards cotton waste. Therefore, he submits that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or from the assessee on the data collected by the Assessing Officer before making an ad-hoc addition of Rs..88,06,811/- towards difference in sale price of cotton waste. The counsel for the assessee submits that there is no loss to the Revenue since the income was assessed under the provisions of section 115JB and therefore the entire exercise is Revenue neutral. 4. The counsel for the Revenue relied on the orders of lower authorities. 5. We have gone through the order sheet copy filed before us and find that nowhere in the order sheet, the assessee or its Authorized Representative agreed for an estimated addition of Rs..88,06,811/- towards difference in sale price of cotton waste. Therefore, the observation of the Assessing Officer tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
