<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (3) TMI 472 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356769</link>
    <description>ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of the assessee regarding allegations of clandestine removal of excess sponge iron production. The tribunal found that revenue&#039;s case was based on suspicion and conjecture without concrete evidence. The assessee provided laboratory reports showing iron ore Fe content of 62.79-63.23%, which the department failed to challenge. The tribunal noted that yield ratios vary between plants due to multiple factors including raw material quality, operating conditions, and plant efficiency. Without finding defects in books of account or rejecting them under Section 145(3), the AO could not estimate excess production. The appeal was decided against revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 May 2025 09:53:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 472 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356769</link>
      <description>ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of the assessee regarding allegations of clandestine removal of excess sponge iron production. The tribunal found that revenue&#039;s case was based on suspicion and conjecture without concrete evidence. The assessee provided laboratory reports showing iron ore Fe content of 62.79-63.23%, which the department failed to challenge. The tribunal noted that yield ratios vary between plants due to multiple factors including raw material quality, operating conditions, and plant efficiency. Without finding defects in books of account or rejecting them under Section 145(3), the AO could not estimate excess production. The appeal was decided against revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356769</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>