(1.) 3862/Del/1996 for the relevant asst. yr. 1991 -92 and other connected appeals.
(2.) It appears that for the asst. yr. 1984 -85, the assessee changed its method of accounting for the purpose of valuation of its closing stock by excluding the excise duty on goods that were cleared but not sold. The correctness of this action was questioned by AO, who did not accept the assessee's change in its method of accounting. The CIT(A) rejected the assessee's appeal. However, the assessee succeeded before the Tribunal. The decision of the Tribunal is reported as ITO vs. Food Specialities Ltd. (1994) 48 TTJ (Del)(SB) 621 : (1994) 49 ITD 21 (Del)(SB).
(3.) Our order -sheets show that on earlier occasions it was stated that the Revenue had filed an application under s. 256 (1) of the IT Act seeking reference of a question of law that had arisen as a result of the decision of the Tribunal. The details with regard to that application were not placed before this Court despite several opportunities and eventually on application under s. 256(1) of the Act, learned counsel for the Revenue shall argue the present appeal. The Revenue was granted liberty to seek expeditious disposal of the pending application before the Tribunal. Today, it has been brought to our notice that the application is not traceable and it is for this reason that we have proceeded to hear this appeal.