2014 (7) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Respondent : None ORDER Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat (Open Court) 1. The office report indicates that the respondent/assessee was served on 22.05.2014. There is no appearance on their behalf. The Court accordingly proceeds to set them down ex parte. 2. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration: - Did the Tribunal fall into error in directing the dele....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ity agreed to be delivered under clause 2 above (i.e. 285,000 Mt) as reduced by the total actual quantity of the commodity delivered by the seller." 4. The assessee had debited Rs. 17,24,24,025/- towards liquidated damages and was asked to substantiate that figure. In reply, the assessee claimed that during the relevant previous year it had incurred expenses on liquidated damages which had to b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dering the submissions, the AO observed that the computation of liquidated damages by the assessee was done on taking the basis of the agreed quantity to be 3 lakh MT as against the actual agreed quantity of 2,85,000 MT, i.e., an excess of 15,000 MT. This was plainly contrary to the agreement itself. The AO, accordingly, disallowed Rs. 1,30,53,263/- and proceeded to issue notice under Section 271 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ugh the records. To say the least, the Tribunal's reasoning which accepts the assessee's contentions with a further rationale that it could have committed a silly mistake, is unsustainable. There was no material on the record to support the assessee's return which claimed an allowance on the basis that the total quantity to be supplied was 3 lakh MT. The first explanation, i.e. that the said figur....