Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2012 (10) TMI 25

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on 12.01.2007 in relation to the assessment year 2003-04. 2. It merits to mention that the assessee has raised an additional ground which is without prejudice to ground no.2 raised in the memo of appeal. Through this additional ground it has been contended that if the addition is to be sustained u/s 145A then the corresponding adjustme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....crore was not liable to be added because the assessee-company erroneously claimed credit of Modvat on the raw material and packing material on the basis of purchase and not on the basis of consumption. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the assessee's contention. He, therefore, made the addition. The learned CIT(A) upheld the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Having heard ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to be included in the value of purchases, sales, opening and closing stock. It is not appropriate to include the closing Modvat in the figure of closing stock without modifying the figures of purchases, sales and opening stock. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. [(2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.)] and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium [(....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....djustment of Rs. 19,23,948, for which addition was made by the A.O. It was argued before the ld. first appellate authority that the TPO ought to have allowed standard adjustment of 5% before making addition as per proviso to section 92C(2). The learned CIT(A) rejected this contention by holding that since the ALP exceeded the price declared by the assessee by more than 5%, the entire excess was li....