https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458240 ITAT Delhi dismissed revenue's appeal on three grounds. First, regarding plastic division loss addition, AO committed factual error by using wrong sales figures (Rs. 45,64,60,012 instead of Rs. 50,02,37,179), incorrectly showing loss of Rs. 4,18,26,767 instead of profit of Rs. 19,50,401. CIT(A) correctly rectified this error based on audited accounts and tax audit report. Second, trade discount deduction was properly allowed as transaction between related entities was supported by documentary evidence. Third, stock shortage of 0.0032% was within acceptable limits compared to FCI norm of 0.50%, considering normal process losses during transit and operations. CIT(A)'s findings were upheld as factually correct and legally sound. en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Oct 2024 13:34:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458240 ITAT Delhi dismissed revenue's appeal on three grounds. First, regarding plastic division loss addition, AO committed factual error by using wrong sales figures (Rs. 45,64,60,012 instead of Rs. 50,02,37,179), incorrectly showing loss of Rs. 4,18,26,767 instead of profit of Rs. 19,50,401. CIT(A) correctly rectified this error based on audited accounts and tax audit report. Second, trade discount deduction was properly allowed as transaction between related entities was supported by documentary evidence. Third, stock shortage of 0.0032% was within acceptable limits compared to FCI norm of 0.50%, considering normal process losses during transit and operations. CIT(A)'s findings were upheld as factually correct and legally sound. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458240