9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, prayed that order of the learned CIT(Appeals) may be set aside and that of the AO be restored to the above extent. 2. Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,1961[hereinafter referred to as the 'Act] on 9.7.2007 ,determining total income of ₹ 59,620/-. Thereafter it transpired that unutilized CENVAT/MODVAT credit of ₹ 13,67,447/- was not credited to Profit & Loss account in terms of provisions of section 145A of the Act. Accordingly, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Act with the service of a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 2.4.2009. In response , the assessee submitted that return filed originally may be treated as return in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stock has to be valued inclusive of MODVAT element. On the other hand, in the "exclusive method" the cost of raw material debited in the purchase account Is net of MODVAT element. In this system, the Appellant have a separate account for accounting for the excise duty payable and the MODVAT credit available to It. The Appellant submits that if the Appellant is following this method of accounting then the closing stock has to be valued exclusive of MODVAT element. It is however, explained that in either of the methods adopted as above, the profit of the Appellant would not change. It is most respectfully submitted that though the Appellant was following "exclusive" method of accounting and that therefore, the closing stoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that this action of Id. AO In not appreciating various evidences placed before him and framing assessment order without referring to evidences placed before him is in breach of principles of natural justice and therefore deserves to be quashed." 4. In the light of aforesaid submissions and relying on decision dated 11- 9-2009 of the ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of M/s.Alpanil Industries Vs. ACIT, in ITA Nos.169 & 170/Ahd/2005 , the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition in the following terms: "5.3 I have considered the facts of the case and the submission made by the assessee. On this issue, the jurisdictional Tribunal's decision In the case of M/s. Alpanil Industries vs ACIT (ITA Nos. 169 & 170/AHD/2005 dated 11/9/2009, after discus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
