9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-II, Kanpur dated 18.5.2012 for assessment year 2005-06. 2. The facts of the case as appearing at para 2 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) are extracted below for reference:- "2. The appellant as proprietor of M/s. Shanky Films is engaged in the business of trading of photographic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of ₹ 45,70,969. The Assessing Officer made disallowance on the ground that the assessee has purchased jumbo films (big rolls) and got it cut into smaller size film and made sales thereof and that the process of cutting big rolls into smaller size cannot be said to be manufacturing or production of any article or thing by an industrial undertaking. The first appellate authority applied the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has shown excess profit in its Pondicherry Unit by claiming lesser amount of interest in Pondicherry Unit and higher amount f interest in all other units." 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of India Cine Agencies vs. CIT [2009] 308 ITR 98 held that conversion of jumbo rolls of photographic films into rolls and small flats of desired size amounts to production. Hence the issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the observation that the assessee has shown excess profits, the first appellate authority has rightly pointed out that the assessee is maintaining separate books of account for each unit. The Assessing Officer has examined the bills and vouchers and not pointed out any defect nor he has made any adverse comment. The first appellate authority has rightly held that the Assessing Officer has not bro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
