9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng counsel appearing for the Revenue and senior counsel Shri Sarangan appearing for the respondent-assessee. 2. The short question raised in the appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the CIT(A) upholding respondent-assessee's claim of loss of ₹ 55,61,146 on account of de-escalation of price of LPG cylinders supplied by respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntire income is assessable. In other words loss if any on account of de-escalation of prices could be accounted only in the subsequent year that is for the asst. yr. 2001-02. The claim of loss therefore was rejected and assessment completed based on the income credited in the accounts. 3. The CIT(A) following the decision of the Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 139 CT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from 1st Nov., 2000. Therefore, what is required to be found out is as to when the oil companies have started effecting recovery of the excess payments made to the respondent-assessee on account of price variation effected retrospectively. We are of the view that the case of the Revenue that income has to be determined in accordance with the system of accounting followed by the assessee in terms o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e without raising bills or debit notes they cannot account the price difference. We also notice that the first appellate authority and the Tribunal which are essentially fact-finding authorities have not considered the way the price difference is accounted by the assessee and by the purchasers. The assessee's contention that only real income is assessable has to be necessarily upheld. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision after verifying the accounts of the assessee and purchasers on accounting of price variation. We make it clear that the assessee should not miss the claim for subsequent years on account of the claim allowed by the Tribunal though erroneously this year. In other words AO should revise even the subsequent assessments if the claim is found allowable in next year or later years. - - TaxT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
