9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 963X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal is justified in sustaining the dis-allowance of interest under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act ?” - Income Tax Appeal No. 1161 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2018 - M. S. Sanklecha And Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ. Mr. Nishit Gandhi i/by. Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate for the appellant Mr. P.C. Chhotaray, Advocate for the respondent ORDER P. C. 1. This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 25th March, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order dated 25th March, 2015 is in respect of Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The appellant, assessee urges only the following question of law for consideration :- 1. Whether, in the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat on that date the appellant made the submissions in support of its Appeal on merits and it was considered in the passing of the impugned order. In the above said facts, the grievance of breach of natural justice cannot be sustained. (iii) Accordingly, question no.1 as proposed does not Tuesday, 6.3.2018 give rise to any substantial question of law. Therefore, it is not entertained. 4. REGARDING QUESTION NO.2 : (i) The appellant, assessee is a Manufacturer, Trader and Processor of copper based chemicals. (ii) During the course of Assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed a discrepancy in the closing stock declared by the appellant in its Balance Sheet and the one furnished to its Banker. The closing stock of Copper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egister which bears only a signature of the Audit Department stating that the Central Excise Records have been verified. No particulars of the figures therein are found to have been mentioned/furnished. In the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order records the fact that the Certificate of the Excise Audit cannot be relied upon. Thus, dismissed. (v) The first grievance of Mr. Gandhi, Learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue is that the authorities under the Act ought to have asked for documents/particular evidence so as to enable the appellant to sustain its claims. This submission cannot be accepted. It is not the job of the adjudicating authority to hunt for evidence in support of one of the parties. It is for the parties, who mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim of closing stock made by the appellant on the basis of the figures indicated in the Balance Sheet is not supported by the evidence on record. In these circumstance, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it is an essentially finding of fact which is not shown to be perverse is any manner. (viii) Accordingly, Question no.2 also does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, the same cannot be entertained. 5. REGARDING QUESTION NO. 3 : (i) Appeal admitted on the substantial question of law at no.3 above. 6. The Registry is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the Tribunal. This would enable the Tribunal to keep the papers and proceedings relevant to this Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
