9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sales nor in the closing stock, of which no proper inventory was furnished. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT (A) on the grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored." 2. The solitary issue arises with reference to the disallowance of purchases of Rs. 35,36,234/-. The purchased items were insulated Kraft Paper imported from two suppliers of Sweden. Since the goods were available in the bonded warehouse, the assessee recorded the purchase of goods and showed it in the closing stock. The Assessing Officer was of the opinion that since assessee has not taken physical delivery of purchased goods till the year end, debit to the purchase account was not correct. He further observed that no details were fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was charged to the P & L Account. There is no dispute with reference to the fact that these goods were available in the bonded warehouse. The Assessing Officer's objection that these are not taken physical delivery is imaginary as the goods were in bonded warehouse which technically is in the custody of the assessee. Therefore, this objection of the Assessing Officer is not correct. With reference to the issue that the same was not shown in the closing stock was also not correct. As seen from the closing stock details filed with the Assessing Officer, the closing stock is shown under the head 'inventory ' under the Schedule-H of the balance sheet. The raw materials were shown at the value of Rs. 88,37,636/- whereas work-in-progress was R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wance on flimsy grounds. Therefore, we uphold the order of the Ld CIT (A). 5. It is very unfortunate that revenue has preferred this appeal which was decided on facts. The CIT should have examined the record before approving the appeal. Had he examined the record, he would not have preferred any appeal on this issue. This shows the sorry state of affairs. It is unnecessary to drag the assessee in appellate proceedings for no fault of it. The CIT should have exercised his discretion and examined the record before preferring the second appeal on an unnecessary issue. This calls for levy of cost. Since, assessee has not asked the same, we refrain from levying any cost. We only wish that revenue authorities apply their mind/wisdom before prefe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
