2015 (4) TMI 828

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the revenue confirming the order passed by the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of hedging loss treating it as speculation loss to Rs. 1,01,417/- instead of Rs. 1,06,65,670/-, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed substantial questions of law; (A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in restricting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of hedging loss treated as speculation loss to Rs. 1,01,417/- instead of Rs. 1,06,65,670/-? (B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in admitting additional evidence furnished before the CIT(A) without giving reasonable opportunity to the Assessing Officer in viola .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Section 43(5) of the Act and consequently the assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 1,18,82,830/-. (2.1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) and considered the material / materials, which were already produced before the Assessing Officer and considered the monthly purchase and sale quantity of gold on actual basis and purchase and sale quantity of gold in MCX, which can be carved out from the bills issued by MCX during the year (which were already produced before the Assessing Officer). The learned CIT(A) held the transactions as hedging transactions and consequently deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der passed by the learned ITAT, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the aforesaid proposed questions of law. (3.0) Shri Manish Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue has vehemently submitted that the learned CIT(A) allowed / admitted the additional evidence furnished before him without giving an opportunity to the Assessing Officer in violation of Rule 46(A)(3) of the Rules while restricting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of hedging loss treating it as speculation loss. No other submissions have been made. (4.0) However, it is required to be noted that in paragraph 3.1, learned CIT(A) observed that complete books of accounts, daily stock register and daily transactions of gold in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X