TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 1286
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved for not being provided proper opportunity of being heard. 2. Briefly stated, the facts as culled out from the record, are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in the manufacturing and selling of salt glazed stoneware pipes and fittings. E-return of income filed on 31/10/2007 declaring income of Rs. 95,38,431/-. Return processed u/s 143(1) on 26/02/99. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) along with the detailed questionnaire were served upon the assessee. Necessary details, as asked for, were filed. The Assessing Officer after making addition towards undisclosed sales of Rs. 1,10,34,221/- assessed the income at Rs. 2,05,72,652/-. As informed by Learned counsel for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter making necessary calculation vis-à-vis quantitative details. Learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that specific query was raised by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and a detailed reply was filed mentioning therein the regular practice by the assessee of filing the stock statement which is subject to 10% variation. The Assessing Officer after going through these details did not find any logic in making the addition and assessed the income accordingly after making other additions. Learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on various judgments and submitted that the assessment order u/s 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and therefore, the order u/s 263....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat both the conditions need to be fulfilled. Hon'ble court further held that the scheme of the Act is to levy and collect tax in accordance with the provisions of the Act and this task is entrusted to the Revenue. If due to an erroneous order of the Income Tax Officer the Revenue is losing tax lawfully payable by the person, it will certainly be prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Hon'ble Court further held that every loss of Revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. For example, when Income Tax Officer adopted one of the course permissible in law and it has resulted in loss of Revenue or where two views are possible and the Income Tax Officer has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pages 21 to 26 of the paper book. The assessee has specifically replied to query No. 13 and has mentioned the quantitative details of raw material, finished goods and stores and spares shown in the books of account as well as in the bank statement. The difference in the quantitative details has been clearly mentioned in this letter. The assessee has also submitted about the genuine problems faced in the course of preparing the stock statement within 5 days at the end of the month due to which some variation within the range of 10% normally happens when the final figures are prepared. We find it pertinent to reproduce the specific portion of the reply given by the assessee in this letter: "Copy of stock statement filed with the bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tc. the books of account are prepared. Therefore, difference between two statements prepared one on the basis of actual figure and one on the basis of estimated is quite natural & normal." From perusal of above extract of reply, we find that assessee has supplied detailed information to the assessing authority relating to issue of stock difference given to bank vis-à-vis books of account. After considering this detailed reply of the assessee dated 26/11/2009 the Assessing Officer has framed the assessment order on 16/12/2009 and completed the assessment proceedings after making addition towards undisclosed sales. We, therefore, are satisfied to the extent that against the specific query raised by the Assessing Officer relating to ....