TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 749
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ORDER 1. We have heard Shri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 29.10.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.340/Ag/2010 for the assessment year 2000-01. 3. The department has preferred the appeal on following questions of law:- "1. Whether t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nor the ld. CIT (A) has taken into consideration the stock inventorized by the Central Excise Department as well as Court Commission as they have gone by the inventory prepared by the Income-tax Authorities at the time of search under Section 132 on 16.2.2000 only. In our considered view the AO as well as the ld. CIT (A) has erred a mistake in not taking into consideration the stock inventory prep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ur considered view, no addition is warranted on account of excess stock detected by the search party as Excise Department and Court Commissioner has prepared the stock inventory minutely. Whatever the excess stock was found which was valued at about Rs.2,00,000/- or so, has already been disclosed by the assessee while filing its return in response to notice under Section 148. Therefore, no additio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt. 6. The argument of Shri Shambhu Chopra that there was inventory stock of more than 700 metric tonnes over and above stock recorded in books of account of the assessee has been considered by the Tribunal. It was found that after two days of the search taken by the department, the Excise Department had also conducted search and had prepared the stock inventory minutely after physical verificat....