The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Jalandhar v. M/S Janta Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Bhogpur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.R. No.128 of 1997 DATE OF DECISION: 13.8.2009 The Commissioner of Income-tax Jalandhar Versus M/s Janta Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Bhogpur ..........Applicant ..........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:-Ms. Navender P.K. Singh, Advocatefor the applicant. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) 1.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsarhas referred, in compliance of order of this Court dated 20.5.1997,following substantial question of law for opinion of this Court:- “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the ld. ITAT was right in law in deleting theaddition of Rs. 12,31,658/- made by the AssessingOfficer and upheld by Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) on account of valuation of closing stock ofsugar?” 2.The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of sugar. Duringthe assessment, additions were made on the ground that from theaccounts of the assessee, true income could not be determined. The basisfor addition, inter alia, was difference in valuation of sugar. The CIT(A)upheld the additions. The Tribunal, however, reversed the view taken bythe lower authorities and deleted the additions. It was observed that I.T.R. No.128 of 1997 method of valuing closing stock adopted by the assessee was consistentfor several years. There was also no reason not to accept the value ofcrystal sugar declared by the assessee. 3.We have heard learned counsel for the revenue and perused the orders. 4.Reference to the order of the Tribunal shows that finding fordeleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer as upheld by the CIT(A) is based on appreciation of evidence. The finding is not shown to beperverse. The Tribunal being final authority on a question of fact, wasjustified in deleting the additions after appreciating evidence on record. 5.Accordingly, the question referred is answered against therevenue and in favour of the assessee. 6.The reference is disposed of. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 13, 2009pooja (DAYA CHAUDHARY)JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No