2018 (3) TMI 963

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es only the following question of law for consideration :- "1. Whether, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the order passed by the Tribunal is arbitrary, perverse and in contravention of the principles of natural justice ? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal is justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 8,61,300/- made solely on account of discrepancy in stock statements ? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal is justified in sustaining the dis-allowance of interest under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act ?" 3. REGARDING QUESTION NO.1 :- (i) Mr. Gandhi, Learned Counsel in support of the Appeal sta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....losing stock declared by the appellant in its Balance Sheet and the one furnished to its Banker. The closing stock of Copper under process in terms of quantum shown to the Banker was in excess to that shown in the Balance Sheet. The Assessee was unable to substantiate its claim with regard to closing stock as indicated in the Balance Sheet. Thus, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 8,61,300/- to the closing stock while determining the income in the Assessment order. (iii) On appeal, the order of the Assessing Officer was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) (CIT (A)) and also by the Tribunal. This is on examination of the appellant's case. (iv) We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted. It is not the job of the adjudicating authority to hunt for evidence in support of one of the parties. It is for the parties, who make a particular claim to lead the evidence in support of its claim and for the adjudicating authority to decide upon the sustainability of the claim on the basis of the evidence led by the parties before it. Laying the blame at the door of the Tribunal for your own failure is preposterous. (vi) Mr. Gandhi, next submitted that the impugned order of the Tribunal is contrary to the order of this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax V/s. Acrow India Ltd., [2008] 298 ITR 447 (Bombay). In the above case, the statement given to a third party i.e. the bank, the Tribunal had held that such a statement could....