Itxa/1692/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-23, Mumbai v. M/S. Delicia Foods, Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1692 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Delicia Foods ..Respondent. Ms. Suchitra Kamble for appellant. Mr. Poras Kaka with A.K. Jasani for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 7TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. The question sought to be raised in the appeal revolves around the appreciation of evidence and findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has taken into account the explanation given by the assessee in para 4 of the order which reads as under:- " At our instance, the assessee has produced even the books of account for the relevant years to justify the findings in the order of the learned CIT(A). The assessee has also filed detailed paper book along with copies of invoices etc. in support of the contentions. We have also test checked the books of account vis-a-vis reconciliation figures submitted before the learned CIT(A), which were found to be correct and reasonable. We have carefully gone through the records including the discussions in the impugned orders. In our view, the addition is totally misconceived and is not based upon any material found in the course of the search and the addition has correctly been deleted by the learned CIT(A). When asked to explain the differences, the assessee has provided proper explanations and explained the method of accounting followed. The assessee has elaborately provided the reconciliation in respect of packing material rejected, discount offered to M/s.Monginis Foods Ltd., cancelling of invoices wrongly prepared etc., each and every item of reconciliation is supported by acceptable documentary evidence and the learned CIT(A) has elaborately discussed the factors that are responsible for the difference and had rightly come to the conclusion that there was no need for making any addition. We agree with his findings and the reasons given thereon for deleting the addition. Therefore, his order is conformed. " 2.In the above view of the matter, the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. The appeal is dismissed in limini with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)