TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Revenue were dismissed; while the assesse's appeal was allowed. 2. The assessment pertaining to the years 2001-02 to 2004-05 were challenged in four appeals filed by the Revenue, while there was a cross-appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the year 2004-05. 3. The appeals arise from the assessments completed under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), except for the assessment year 2004-05, which was competed under Section 143(3) of the Act. Since the issues involved were common, it was disposed of by a common order by the Tribunal. 4. The facts in brief are thus: The assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading in edible oil (refining of crude....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l, Government of India (Taxes) and the learned Counsel appearing for the assessee. 8. Regarding the percentage of waste in the refining process of palm oil and palmolein, the assessee claimed wastage at 7.90%. The A.O. on visiting the premises of the assessee's factory and based on the statement of the Production Manager, who had allegedly admitted that the wastage of the oil in the bleaching process was not more than 0.25%, made an assessment that the wastage could not be more than 0.65%. It was found that the wastage claimed for all the years was calculated at a higher rate and additions made. The A.O. could not have on his own assessment, arrived at a conclusion regarding the quantity of wastage in a technical process involved in re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ansportation; found the claim to be excessive for reason of no claim was raised before the insurer. The A.O. found that the assessee has not furnished any evidence to the effect of having made a claim with the Insurance Company for the alleged loss in transportation and therefore, the A.O. restricted the transport loss at 0.25% and disallowed the excess claimed by the assessee for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. With respect to assessment year 2004-05, the A.O. has observed that as per the Marine Surveyors Certificate, loss to the extent of 0.1% was permissible and above the said loss, the assessee could have lodged a claim to the Insurance Company for reimbursement and the claim for that assessment year was disallowed as excess. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee had utterly failed to bring on record anything on this count. The learned Counsel for the assessee would argue that the diary was in the form of an order book and no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee as the hard-disk of the computer was seized during the course of search. It is also submitted that the rates of palm oil and palmolein are different. The Tribunal has observed that the A.O. has not made any attempt to separate the quantity of the cash sales of palm oil and palmolein, but has taken an average rate. That could not have been done because the rates are different. The diary, which was seized, is only an order book and additions could not have been made on the presumption that the order book is final, and th....