2017 (11) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Advocate ORDER 1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act challenging an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confirming the orders of the Appellate Commissioner. 2. The assessee is a sugar manufacturer; whose assessment for AY 1999-2000 was picked up for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer, based on the re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onsideration by the AO were disregarded; the stock stood verified in accordance with the assessee's contentions. Consequently, the CIT(A) allowed the appeal. This order was confirmed by the ITAT. 5. Learned counsel highlights that the scope of the remand was to take into account the stock statements filed with the Bank and this was not realistically done. It is contended that the CIT(A) misappr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Moreover, the AO in his order has only considered the closing stock of sugar as on 31.03.1999, as per the bank statement which is at 3,98,125 Qtls. and after comparing the same with that of the closing stock as on 31st March 1999 in the audited accounts i.e. 3,10,934 Qtls. and gone on to add the difference in excess stock of 87,191 Qtls. as assessee's income for the year. In this con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s per the statement given to the bank then what remains is quantitative difference of only 3 Qtls. of sugar which is practically negligible. Therefore seen from this perspective too there is no ground for making addition to income on account of excess stock of sugar in the previous year relevant to this assessment year. These facts also lend credence to the submission of the appellant that the sta....