AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 1039
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A' (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeals assailing the following orders Tax Appeal No. Date of Tribunal's order ITA No. Assessment Year 1277/07 28.02.2007 1679/Ahd/2000 1989-90 1279/07 28.02.2007 1681/Ahd/2000 1991-92 1280/07 28.02.2007 1682/Ahd/2000 1992-93 1281/07 28.02.2007 1683/Ahd/2000 1993-94 1282/07 28.02.2007 1684/Ahd/2000 1994-95 1283/07 28.02.2007 1702/Ahd/2000 1991-92 1284/07 28.02.2007 1703/Ahd/2000 1992-93 1285/07 28.02.2007 1704/Ahd/2000 1993-94 1286/07 28.02.2007 1705/Ahd/2000 1994-95 2. These matters were admitted by this Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Appeal No. 1286 of 2007 Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition made in respect of salt washing loss? 3. The Assessing Officer made addition in respect of unexplained transportation cost observing that the assessee being manufacturer of soda ash had required coal to run its boilers. It used to purchase coal from Eastern Coalfields Ltd (SECL) located in the interior parts of Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa. On cross verification with the General Manager of SECL, it was found that the assessee had not accounted for part purchase of total coal purchase. The Assessing Officer made addition of the value of coal and transportation charges. The Assessing Officer also came to the conclusion tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spect of the unaccounted purchase of coal by the assessee after rejecting the assessee's unbelievable story held that somebody had taken away and used letterheads without the knowledge of the assessee particularly in absence of any evidence in this regard. He submitted that when the said addition in respect of unaccounted purchase was confirmed by the Tribunal and the factum of it being sold at 8% premium without reflecting in the books of account, it was quite logical that the coal had been lifted from the colliery and transported to the place of coal used by the assessee itself. He submitted that without transportation the purchase and sale of coal from colliery to the place of actual used was not possible. 4.1 Mr. Bhatt further submit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has deleted the addition in respect of salt washing loss. He has also drawn the attention of this Court page 7 of Tax Appeal No. 5 of 2004 which is for the assessment year 1990-91 and submitted that it is pertinent to note that the loss for the year in question in Tax Appeal No. 5 of 2004 was actually on the basis of estimate. He submitted that the factors such as rain, total density of rainfall, heap size and location, frequency of rain and continuity of rain etc are required to be taken into consideration and therefore the Tribunal has rightly concluded that the restriction of loss claimed by the AO and CIT(A) is not warranted. 6. So far as the question regarding deleting the addition made on account of unexplained transportation cost....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Company has also recognized the salt loss while settling claims of the parties and the Superintendent of Salt has also approved the salt loss. It is required to be noted that in the year 1990-91 the assessee had not supplied cogent materials substantiating its claim and therefore the loss was disallowed which is evident from the decision rendered by this Court in Tax Appeal No. 5 of 2004. We are of the view that the Tribunal is justified in disallowing the salt washing loss. We accordingly answer the said question in favour of assessee and against the revenue. 8. So far as the question regarding deleting the disallowance made in respect of the expenditure incurred for the presentation articles/gifts which was made by the Assessing Offic....