9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in ignoring the factual findings of the assessing officer, and going only by the confidential note in respect of a subsequent assessment year?" 2. The assessee claimed an expenditure of Rs.14.60 lakhs as lease rental payable to various finance companies. The Assessing Authority noted that the assessee had inflated the claim on the value of cost of acquisition on steel rolls from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.60,000/-. Consequently, in respect of assessment year 1995-96, he restricted the claim on lease rentals by Rs.15,000/- as cost of steel rolls. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals partly allowed the appeal. but rejected the cost of acquisition of eac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1997-98. It was noted therein that the rate for each roll is different depending upon its specifications. The note relied on by the assessee stated as follows: "The value of Rolls utilized in the assessee's factory is more than Rs.60,000/-. The value estimated in the assessment order for 1996-97 is Rs.15,000/- which has been arrived at on erroneous comparison. Since the assessment for 1996-97 has been confirmed by CIT (A) the addition of Rs.58,91,945/- has been made as above in line with the decision taken in that assessment order. However, for the fresh lease transactions entered into this year appropriate action has been taken as mentioned in the order as per discussions held with the Additional CIT." 4. On the basis of the said notes, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in extracting it as a part of the order to allow the claim. 7. The appeal lacks merits and has to be rejected at the admission stage itself. The objection stated in the appeal is solely on the Tribunal passing its order on the strength of the view of the Department for the subsequent year. We failed to see any trace of unfairness leave alone an illegality in the order of the tribunal in following the opinion expressed in the noteby the deputy commissioner to give rise to a substantive question of law. The admitted statement in the note is that the assessment for the year 1996-97 at Rs.15,000/- had been arrived at on an erroneous comparison, that being so, fairness requires that the Revenue should have respected its own file note and desis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
