Held that the inspection was conducted on March 29, 2013 and could not be relied upon to conclude what was the state of affairs in or up to November, 2011. The Inspector’s report lacked technical knowledge or awareness of the product being manufactured. The distinction in the end product being manufactured, at the time of inspection as opposed to air conditioners being manufactured in 2011 was not noticed. The employees whose statements had been relied upon were admittedly not authorised personnel, and not competent to comment. The report, accordingly, was a meaningless exercise. Effective and a fair hearing on the issues was denied to the assessee. The unit had been duly set up in the leased premises, electricity usage, machinery had been purchased by the new unit and the air conditioners had been manufactured and sold and had been accepted by the excise authorities and all contemporaneous evidence remained unassailed on record. Order of CIT(A) was affirmed. (AY.2010-11, 2012-13)