9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in the purchase as pointed out in the impugned order and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to tax the value of 1737.45 mt.ton of goods less 5% on account of breakerages as unaccounted investment in purchase. 2 The matter was earlier decided by this Tribunal vide order dated 24.3.2010. The revenue carried the matter to the Hon'ble High Court and then to Hon'ble Supreme Court in civil appeal no. 6242/2012 arising out of SLP( C) No..25005 of 2012. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after taking note of the fact that by mistake the assessee applied the conversion factor of 250 grms per cake, which was wrongly taken from liquid soap and applied it as a conversion factor for dettol soap fresh. Since this aspect was not brought to the notice of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port as under: Purchases Quantity (MT) Opening stock 1020.31 Purchases 10608.82 11629.13 Sales 12599.99 766.73 3.3 From the figures as recorded by the CIT, it is clear that the assessee has shown more sales in the quantity then the total quantitative value available with the assessee comprising opening stock and purchases. Accordingly, the CIT has directed the Assessing Officer in para 9 as under: "I9. In the light of discussion made in the foregoing paragraph, I am unable to accept the contention of the authorised representative of the assessee,. The stock difference of 1737.45 MT should have been considered in the assessment. The Assessing Officer is directed to tax the value of 1737.545 MT of goods less 5% on account of break ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT for short) to re-examine his aspect of conversion factor applicable to soap in the present case. We express no opinion on the merits of the case." 5 It is clear that the assessee has accepted that there was a mistake in the details and the quantitative figures of stock as given in the Schedule 17. Therefore, on principle we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned revision order passed by the CIT. However, since it was stated to be a mistake by applying wrong conversion factor by the assessee which has resulted the discrepancy in the quantitative stock of purchase; therefore, this aspect requires examination of the facts. The relevant record is not available before us and both the parties agree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
