9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 20.11.2012, Annexure P.3 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench Amritsar in ITA No.91(ASR)/2011, for the assessment year 2007-08, claiming following substantial questions of law:- "i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition of Rs. 5,59,50,097/- made by the AO and sustained by learned CIT(A) on account of suppression of sales and after rejecting the books of account under section 145(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the AO has rightly made the addition by thoroughly examining assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings, the Assessing Officer made addition on the basis of the data submitted by the assessee (Chart A) in which details of monthwise consumption of various raw material, production of finished goods, scrap generated etc. were given. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee on 18.12.2009 pointing out that the said chart revealed unbelievable variation in the ratios of production to raw material consumptions, of scrap generation, of invisible loss and even negative losses in two months. The scrap generation was shown at 5,182.994 MTS on raw material consumption of 10,820.442 MTS which was a very high ratio as compared to the percentage of scrap generated by standard mills using induction furnaces or rotary furnaces. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,59,753/-. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 31.12.2010, Annexure P.2, the CIT(A) allowed relief of Rs. 11,72,09,656/-. Both the assessee and the revenue filed appeals before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 20.11.2012, Annexure P.3, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed that of the revenue by deleting the addition of Rs. 5,59,50,097/- made on account of suppression of sales which was sustained by the CIT(A). Hence the instant appeals by the revenue. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. A perusal of the orders passed by the authorities below shows that the assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial and manufacturing cost had been debited to the profit and loss account by the assessee and the addition was only on account of suppression of sales,no further deduction of expenditure against the aforesaid computed suppressed sales was allowed. Hence addition of Rs. 5,59,50,097/- was sustained out the addition of Rs. 17,31,59,753/- made by the Assessing Officer. Both the assessee and the revenue filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the matter allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and dismissed that of the revenue holding that the revised figures submitted by the assessee having not been considered, the books of account could not be rejected and no addition on that account could be made. Thus, the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
