2015 (2) TMI 906
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umar, Adv. ORDER 1. The revenue is in appeal against an order dated 20.06.2014 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No.5613/Del./2012. The ITAT had confirmed the order of the Appellate Commissioner. The latter had directed the deletion of the findings of the Assessing Officer (AO) in respect of the assessee's returns for assessment year 2009-10. The AO had proceeded to work....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y unrelated concern i.e. PVR Ship Breaking Company. The assessee had contended that the scrap generated by it was in the form of thin iron sheets of 0.27 mm to 0.50 mm thick, which remained uncontroverted. The AO had rejected its contentions and proceeded to determine the scrap value at a much higher rate, entirely based upon the amounts earned by PVR Ship Breaking Company. 4. The assessee'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....omparable. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed that M/S Makino Auto Industries has described the scrap sold as ?Iron scrap? (Branded goods). In so far as M/s PVR Ship Breaking Company is concerned, the scrap in that case resulting from ship breaking was qualitatively different. In comparison with these two cases, the assessee generated scrap from very thin iron sheets of .27 mm to .50 mm thickness. Nothin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... year is marginally higher than that of the preceding year, we are of the considered opinion that no fault can be found with the Id. CIT(A) in deleting this addition." 5. This Court notices that besides the question as to correctness of concurrent finding the questions urged on behalf of the revenue are fact intensive. We are satisfied that the AO did not apply his mind to the circumstances of ....
TaxTMI