COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. AKAR LAMINATORS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue has preferred the present appeal by raising the following questions:

(2.) ON question A, it appears that the Assessing Officer in view of the fact that no evidence was produced as it was called upon by the Assessing Officer, he invoked the power under section 144 of the Income -tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and then disallowed the claim for gross loss to the fullest extent. In the appeal before the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals), the view of the Assessing Officer was concurred but the relevant aspect is that there was no examination of the material on record in appeal. The Tribunal recorded the finding at paragraph 9, which reads as under:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Revenue submitted that if the documents were not produced, the Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing the entire gross profit and the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) had rightly conferred with the view of the Assessing Officer. She submitted that the Tribunal, which is ultimate fact finding authority ought to have appreciated the evidence on record and ought to have given the finding of fact as to what extent, the disallowance of the loss could be made and instead that the Tribunal has given second innings to the assessee, which in her submission, was impermissible. She relied upon the decision of this court in the case of Rajesh Babubhai Damania v. CIT reported at : [2001] 251) ITR 541 (Guj) and, therefore, she submitted that the, appeal deserves consideration on the said question raised.