TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the parties on year to year basis, the reasoning given by the tribunal de hors the evidence existing on record is not sustainable inasmuch as specific evidence and reasoning that had been considered by the C.I.T. (Appeal) was required to be weighed first and if the same any estimation was to be made thereafter, other evidence may have been relevant. We are therefore of the opinion that the matter requires to be examined afresh by the tribunal especially in view of the excise record produced by the assessee before the C.I.T. (Appeal) as also before the tribunal. - Income Tax Appeal No. 148, 58 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2017 - Hon'ble Bharati Sapru And Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh, JJ. For Appellant : Shakeel Ahmad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt proceedings under section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, the assessing officer took note of the fall in the yield of bagasse and called for explanation of the assessee. He estimated the production of bagasse at 36% as against 33.06% declared by the assessee and made a corresponding addition of ₹ 83,40,643/- to the income of the assessee. Similarly in respect of manufacturing of sugar, the assessing officer estimated yield of sugar at 9% instead of 7.25% declared by the assessee and made a corresponding addition of ₹ 3,00,73,793/- to the income of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the C.I.T. (Appeal). Amongst others, it was urged before the the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), the man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was a decision in the appeal filed by the department against the order of the tribunal wherein the department had contended that the yield of sugar be estimated at 9% not at 8% as accepted by the tribunal. While the above department's appeal stand dismissed ex parte without there representation by the assessee, suffice it to say that by the said order this court has refused to entertain the appeal filed by the department claiming a higher estimation. The issue of further reduction of the yield on account of documentary evidence in the shape of excise record was neither raised nor considered in that appeal and in fact it was not an issue adjudicated by this court. Thus while the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals has looked at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
