https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236523 The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision and upheld the Assessing Officer's addition of Rs. 40,42,564 for the shortage of finished goods stock, emphasizing the importance of proper evidence and consistent reasoning in reconciling stock differences. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s decision lacked a basis or was contradictory to the evidence presented, ultimately ruling in favor of the Revenue and reinstating the original addition made by the A.O. en-us Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236523 The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision and upheld the Assessing Officer's addition of Rs. 40,42,564 for the shortage of finished goods stock, emphasizing the importance of proper evidence and consistent reasoning in reconciling stock differences. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s decision lacked a basis or was contradictory to the evidence presented, ultimately ruling in favor of the Revenue and reinstating the original addition made by the A.O. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236523