TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1400
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} Shri R.V. Easwar, President and Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member For the Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar For the Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar O R D E R Per B. Ramakotaiah, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the CIT(A)- VIII, Mumbai dated 06.10.2009 for A.Y. 2006-07. 2. Assessee has raised the following grounds: - "1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the action of the learned Assessing Officer in adding excise duty amounting to ₹ 3439994/- not due and not provided in the accounts and not claimed as expenditure by ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch goods and consequently not included in the valuation of inventory'. Eventhough the said Note specifies that there is no effect on profit of such non-provision, the A.O. was of the opinion that the assessee has not followed provisions of section 145A and accordingly he proposed to add the said amount to the valuation of closing stock. Assessee submitted that it was the accounting practice of taking liability of finished goods at the time of clearance of goods and assessee was availing Modvat credit as well as paying taxes of excise duty accordingly. It also submitted letter dated 12.12.2008 contesting the issue on legal grounds and further submitting that assessee company has paid a sum of ₹ 3,29,01,890/- upto 30.11.2006 which incl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adjustment of excise duty made by the AO. It was further submitted that the addition made by the A.O. in the valuation of closing stock under section 145A of the Act does not arise as the same was paid before the due date for filing the return and has to be allowed under Sec.43B. He then referred to the submission made before the A.O. which were partly extracted in the assessment order ignoring the fact of payment of ₹ 3,29,01,890/- and also the submission before the CIT(A). He submitted that the CIT(A) relied on Form ER-1 submitted to the CIT(A) as part of evidencing the payment of excise duty. The Ld Counsel stated that taking the figure on the basis of the statement made on 10.04.2006, the CIT(A) ignored the balance of statements ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....book at page No. 52 and had given credit to the CENVAT credit availed upto 10.04.2006. He, however, not considered the CENVAT credit availed subsequently before filing the return and as can be seen from the record the assessee has paid more than ₹ 3.30 crores upto 30.11.2006 which includes CENVAT credit as well as payment under PLA account of ₹ 73,50,000/-. Coming to the merits of the addition, on the fact that assessee has discharged the liability under section 43B, the assessee is entitled for deduction of the same amount which was added by the A.O. under the provisions of section 145A. As per the first proviso to Sec.43B, if any sum is discharged on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of in....