ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. - (1.) THE Revenue has preferred this appeal under s. 260A of IT Act, 1961 against the order of learned Tribunal, Chandigarh following substantial questions of law : "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 29,50,950 made on account of value of excess stock of Narma/Kapas found by the market committee authorities during the course of surveys carried out on the assessee's business premises not only once but on different dates i.e., 18th purchase thereof outside the account books ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition referred to above by recording an erroneous finding contrary to record that there was no adverse material especially when the AO disbelieved the books of account maintained by the assessee by recording specifically -
(2.) IN the course of assessment, the AO held that at the time of inspection, excess stock of cotton was found by the representative of market committee, over and above the stock entered in the books of account. The said stock was liable to be added to the income. The assessee explained that there was no excess stock and even the market committee did not assess fee on the alleged excess stock, though by way of compromise, the assessee paid the sum of Rs. 13,200 towards market fee. The partners of the firm were residing in Bangalore and Bhubneshwar and there may be some discrepancies in maintenance of record.
(3.) THE CIT(A) had accepted the explanation of the assessee. This view has been affirmed by the Tribunal. We have learned counsel for the Revenue.;