TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e subsidy received should not be reduced from the cost of assets for the purpose of allowing depreciation and investment allowance? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,47,557 made by the Income-tax Officer to the income declared?" The assessment year involved is 1982-83. In so far as the first question is concerned, Mr. C. V. Rajan, learned counsel for the Revenue, stated that the issue raised in the said question is fully covered by the decision in CIT v. P. J. Chemicals Ltd. [1994] 210 ITR 830 (SC) against the Revenue. The Supreme Court in that case has held that the Central subsidy received should not be reduced from the cost of assets for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have not been rejected and the stock position reflected in its accounts tallied with the statutorily maintained R. G. register maintained for excise purposes and the stock declared in the return should be taken as the correct closing stock and not the stock declared to the bank for the purpose of obtaining loan. On the other hand, it was urged on behalf of the Revenue that the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) did not call for any interference. The Appellate Tribunal found that the assessee has been maintaining accounts and the accounts have not been rejected by the Department as not representing the correct stock position. The Appellate Tribunal, following the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Ramakrishna Mills (Coimba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case and as the finding is one of fact, no question of law arises out of the order of the Appellate Tribunal. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. The Appellate Tribunal noticed that the books of account have not been rejected by the Department, as not representing the correct stock position. The Appellate Tribunal also found that the assessee had declared a higher quantity of closing stock to the bank for the purpose of securing the loan. The Appellate Tribunal has not rejected the contention urged on behalf of the assessee that the stock position reflected in the accounts tallied with the R. G. register. In view of the above factual settings, the Appellate Tribunal came to the conclusion that the closing stock declared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
