9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2002 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after set off of brought forward business losses of earlier years. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed under section 143(3) vide order dated 04.02.2005 and the total income was determined at Rs. 01,82,500/- after setting off of business losses and unabsorbed depreciation. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 23.10.2009 granted substantial relief to the Assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds;- 1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the AO to delete addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- made on account of exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the addition by holding as under:- 2.1. Before me, appellant relied upon the decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Naran Lala Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.686/Ahd/2006 and Chemical & Dyestuff Industries in ITA No.1077/Ahd/2009, wherein following the decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of D & H Secheron Electrodes Pvt. Ltd. 173 Taxman, 188, ITAT Ahmedabad held that when finished goods are not sold or cleared and element of excise duty thereon has not been incurred and debited in the TRADING ACCOUNT of the year, there was no question of making any addition to the value of the closing STOCK . Appellant further submitted that even otherwise if excise duty on finished goods was debited to the TRADING ACCOUNT , the same would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions and perused the material on record. We find that ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition had relied upon the decision of Ahmedabad Tribunal wherein it was held that when finished goods are not sold or cleared and element of excise duty thereon has not been incurred and debited to the trading account of the year, there was no question of making any addition to the value of closing stock. Before us, Revenue has not brought any contrary binding decision in its support. We further find that Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Loknete Balasaheb Desai SSK Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 288 (Bom) has held that in respect of excisable goods manufactured and lying in stock, the excise duty liability would get crystallized on the dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lier years, disallowance cannot be made for the year under appeal. In this regard, appellant relied upon decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of Sridev Enterprises 192 ITR 165. Appellant relied upon decisions in the case of Munjal Sales, 298 ITR 298 and Reliance Utility and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) holding that if sufficient interest free FUNDS were available, disallowance of interest could not be made. Lastly, appellant contended that in case of Amin Panel, the transactions-were business transactions and hence any advances on that account could not be treated as not relating to business. 4.2. I have considered the matter. As per the ledger accounts of the parties, interest in respect of which has been calculated b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
