9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... long with the stock was taken over by the company on 08.01.2012, therefore, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the assessing officer for fresh consideration on this aspect after due opportunity to the assessee. For the above reasons, the Tax case Appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer to verify the aspect, which has been pointed out in the preceding paragraphs. - Tax Case Appeal No.488 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 6-10-2020 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN For Appellant : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan for Mr.Venkata Narayanan for M/s Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanaban For Respondent : Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 together with all its assets and liabilities, as they stood in the books of the firm at the close of business on 07.01.2012. The fact regarding taking over of the company has not been disputed by the assessing officer rather recorded in the assessment order dated 23.03.2015. 4. The scrutiny assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act by order dated 23.03.2015 for the period from 01.04.2011 to 07.01.2012 determining the total income at ₹ 10,60,68,780/-. The assessing officer while completing the assessment made an addition of ₹ 30,58,131/- towards valuation of closing stock among others on the ground that the valuation of closing stock does not give the true and correct status of business and profit and the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee in the next year and not in a case where the business of the assessee along with the stock was taken over by the company on 08.01.2012. 8. It is the further submission that what was relevant to be noted is that it is a sale of the stock and not valuing of stock, which will be continuing with the assessee in the next year. On a reading of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, we find that though this issue was raised by the assessee before the Tribunal in a slightly different form, than what has been raised before us, the Tribunal did not deal with the said issue, but followed the earlier decision in assessee's case dated 08.02.2017 and dismissed the assessee's appeal. 9. In our considered view the issue with regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
