TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see - TAX APPEAL NO. 136 of 2002 With TAX APPEAL NO. 138 of 2002 - - - Dated:- 9-6-2016 - MR. KS JHAVERI AND MR. G.R.UDHWANI, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MR BHARGAV HASURKAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE OPPONENT : MR NITIN K MEHTA, ADVOCATE COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of Tax Appeal No.136/2002, the Appellant Company has challenged the common judgment and order dated 27.08.2001 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench C in ITA No.3834/Ahd/1992 whereas Tax Appeal No.138/2002 is preferred by the Appellant against the above cited order in ITA No.3614/Ahd/1992 for the Assessment Year 1977-1978. 2. On 20.03.2002, the following questions were framed for consideration by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. IndoMag SteelTechnology Ltd. reported in [2010] 328 ITR 37 (Delhi) wherein it was observed as under:- 6. Having regard to the aforesaid factual position as well as of legal position, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises for consideration. We may, however, discuss one argument addressed by the learned counsel for the Department. It is submitted that even as per AS-2, the travelling cost was to be included in the cost of inventories. The learned counsel referred to paragraph 6 of AS-2 which reads as under :- 6. The cost of inventories should comprise all costs of purchase, costs of conversion and other costs incurred in bringing the inventories to their present location and condition. 7. It is, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly argued by the counsel for the assessee that travel costs directly charged had been charged off as an expenditure in the profit and loss account in the year in which the same was incurred and it is only indirect travelling cost which was not included. This very plea was raised before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal has accepted the same. However, at the same time, we find that there is no verification of this plea because of the reason that the Assessing Officer did not go into this question and he had made addition in respect of the entire cost without going into the question as to whether it was direct or indirect cost. Thus, while we do not find any error in the order of the Tribunal and are of the opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
