TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 126
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otal non-cooperation. The assessee filed additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) forwarded additional evidences to the Assessing Officer, who gave consent for admission only on the facts were to be decided on merit. The CIT(A) ought to have conveyed his findings on merit to the Assessing Officer for his comments/reports. Thus, the order of the CIT(A) lacks merit in so far as the comments of the Assessing Officer on the merit of the disputed additions/disallowances were not obtained. 2. The CIT(A) erred in passing not a speaking order. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and records perused. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee has not submitted details called for, therefore, addition was made on account of long term ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee filed application under Rule 46A of the I. T. Rule and enclosed the additional evidence which are available on page number 25 to 29 and page number 152 & 153. The appellant has also filed the detail of same along with supporting, with his reply dated 5th December, 2008, which are on page number 1 to 7. After going through the same and appreciating the supporting it is found that the contention of the appellant that the cost of acquisition and improvement of the said property was Rs.20,28,091/- which is also evidenced from the Balance Sheet of the appellant for the Financial Year 2001-02 and onwards. Thus the Computation of Income of the appellant which shows that after considering the investment of Rs. 11,60,000/- made by the appellant i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of income and Profit and Loss Account, Capital Account it is found that this plea of the appellant is also correct that as he has not claimed any deduction on account of Interest Paid hence the question of assessing Notional Interest does not at all arises. Had any interest payment been claimed as deduction, then only question of disallowance could have been considered. Such action on the part of AO is without any authority in law Thus on overall consideration of facts and circumstance of the case and the appellant's contention, the addition made by the A.O. at Rs. 15,71,923/- is found to be totally unwarranted and uncalled for and accordingly directed to be deleted. 4.4 Ground No.4 relates to addition of Rs. l,53,89,619/- on account o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brokerage and find that both the figures are in agreement which will be clear from the followings:- 1. That in the earlier statement which is on Page 105 and 4A a common account of Urad future and Urad Delivery was given and net loss of Rs. 11,04,568/- was claimed in computation of income. 2. The reason for setoff of profit of Urad Delivery against the Urad Future was that the no profit was arises from the sales of Urad Delivery based and same was arises from the auction of transaction 849.62 Mt. due the reason that the seller failed to give delivery thus the transaction was converted in to Close Out consequent there to it converted in to speculative transaction and thus profit of Rs. 10,47,774/- arises and after taking the effect of bro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....certificate from Navratan Commodex which is on page 9 of reply dated 5th December,2008, have been carefully examined and necessary clarification as extracted above have been obtained. All these documents were made available to AO for comments as noted above. It is more than apparent from the evidences filed by the appellant that there is sufficient force in the contentions of the appellant, that when in the Future Trading Account purchases are debited to the extent of sales then question of showing closing stock of Future Urad purchased in the last fortnight of March, 2005 in the Trading Account does not arise. Thus the appellant has rightly shown the closing stock of Future Urad amounting to Rs. 1,53,89,619/- in the Balance Sheet and in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee. We also found that during the year, the assessee has not incurred any interest expenditure, thus, there is no justification for making any addition on account of notional interest. We confirm the action of the CIT(A) for deleting the addition made on account of notional interest income amounting to Rs. 15,71,923/-. 9. In respect of trading addition on account of closing stock shown in the balance sheet, the ld. CIT(A) after verification of various bills of future purchase, sales etc., recorded a finding to the effect that in the trading account, the assessee had just debited cost of sales , therefore, there is nothing wrong in showing closing stock directly in the balance sheet. The ld. CIT(A) also found that the closing s....