TMI Blog1995 (1) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ror on record, much less an error which could be said to be prejudicial to the interest of Revenue, the order of the learned CIT, under s. 263 of the Act is bad in law against evidence on record and unwarranted on facts. 4. The learned CIT has further erred in not properly appreciating the explanation of the appellant with special reference to the activities of the appellant society and as such he has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to disallow the loss of Rs. 7,71,083. 5. The learned CIT, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ought to have held that the loss of Rs. 7,71,083 for the year under appeal could not be adjudicated upon in isolation de hors the recovery made by the appellant in subsequent year, and taki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at such a deduction cannot be allowed by way of loss on account of short landing of goods without making any efforts to get the refund thereof. The learned counsel submitted that the reality of the loss in question has not been doubted. The CIT has himself mentioned in the said order under s. 263 that the assessee has furnished a short landing certificate from the Bombay Port Trust Authority. The certificate says that out of 240 packages in the bill entry only 222 packages landed which has resulted in the said loss. The question as to whether the assessee could claim a loss before the insurance company, Bombay Port Trust Authority or the supplier of the goods is exclusively within the dominion of the trader and this aspect of the matter has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t had taken place. It is apparent from the order passed by the learned CIT that out of 240 packages mentioned in the bill of entry only 222 packages landed which resulted in loss of the balance quantity of goods. The amount of Rs. 52,053 representing the value of the short landing of the quantity of goods imported is also an undisputed figure. The mere fact that the assessee has chosen not to make a claim against the insurance company or Bombay Port Trust Authority or with the supplier of goods would not be a valid ground for disallowance of the amount in question because such a course of action opted by the assessee of not resorting to any such proceedings may be based on commercial considerations or at the most it may be a lapse on the pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
