TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Excise Department. In that view of the matter, in view of the direction of this court, the Tribunal has committed error in sustaining the addition of ₹ 3,78,112/- made by the Assessing Officer as confirmed in appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals). We, therefore, allow the appeal in favour of the assessee. - Tax Appeal No. 1480 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 14-7-2016 - KS Jhaveri And G. R. Udhw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- towards unaccounted sales by going beyond the scope of directions issued by the High Court in the earlier round of litigation? 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that this is second round of litigation. The High Court in earlier Tax Appeal No. 609 of 2003 while deciding the issue, has remanded the matter to the Tribunal with the following directions: In view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : The above facts clearly prove that the assessee has not suppressed the investment on purchases and all the cost including basic cost of raw material and the manufacturing cost thereof has been debited in the books of accounts to the full extent. Here it would be pertinent to mention that no evidence relating to suppression of purchases was detected by the Excise Department either. 3.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer by dismissing the appeal. In further appeal, the Tribunal also dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee. He has thus contended that the Tribunal has committed a serious error in dismissing the appeal preferred by the assessee and again confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer. He has contended that the Tribunal has, without appreciation of factual aspects and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
