TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranted. - Special Civil Application No. 4748 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 5-5-2014 - Akil Kureshi And Sonia Gokani,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. S. B. Soparkar, Sr. Adv, with Mr. B. S. Soparkar, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. Sudhir M. Mehta, Adv ORDER (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi) Petitioner has approached at an interim stage where the Department is insisting on the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs. 124 Crores to enjoy stay against recovery of rest of the demands. Brief facts are that the petitioner is a State owned Corporation engaged in the business of buying and selling of petroleum products. For the A.Y 2011-12, the Assessing Officer framed assessment making several additions totalling to approximately ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition on an issue on which the Commissioner [Appeals] has granted relief to the assessee for the earlier assessment year. As of now, therefore, such addition is contrary to the decision of CIT [Appeals]. The remainder of approximately Rs. 420 Crores includes a sum of Rs. 370 Crores which is the bulk of the disputed additions. The addition pertains to alleged excess stock of gas, which according to the Assessing Officer remained unexplained during the assessment proceedings. The explanation of the assessee is that the gas is purchased, measured in the measurement referred to as MMBTU. It is sold also sometime in MMBTU and sometime in cubic meter of gas. According to the assessee, if the figures of purchase and sales appropriately converte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covery, we do not wish to make any final conclusive observations. We have considered the issues only prima facie. On the basis of which, it appears that addition approximately worth Rs. 140 crores represents the excess sale of gas in million cubic meter units, which the Assessing Officer did not account for in the order of assessment. Even the respondent has not seriously disputed this aspect. In the affidavitinreply dated 24th April 2014 filed by one Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Gandhinagar, it is stated as under :- 16. It is respectfully submitted that in A.Y 2011-12, the difference in MMBTU between purchases and sales is 15.75 million MMBTU [125.43 - 109.68]. In the assessment order, it is further noted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
