Damaged stock explanation sustained: deletion of closing stock addition upheld and remand for further verification rejected.

Concurrent factual findings accepted the taxpayer's explanation that the disputed closing stock represented damaged goods, and the record supported the claim that the goods were prone to damage. On that basis, the addition for alleged suppression of closing stock was deleted. Since both the first appellate authority and the Tribunal had accepted the same factual explanation, no useful purpose would be served by remitting the matter for further verification of bank officers' records, and remand was therefore found unnecessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether the addition made on account of suppression of closing stock was rightly deleted and whether the matter required remand for further verification of the bank officers' records.

Analysis: The explanation that the disputed amount represented damaged goods was accepted by both the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. The material on record supported the claim that the goods were prone to damage and that the factual explanation had been concurrently accepted by the two fact-finding authorities. In these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by remitting the matter for further examination of bank officers.

Conclusion: The deletion of the addition was upheld and remand was held to be unnecessary.

---