VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES A, JAIPUR JH JES'K LH 'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH LANHI XLKA ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 1291/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, PLOT NO. 17 & 18, KHASRA NO. 1078, ALWAR NO. 1, JAIL CIRCLE, ALWAR (RAJ.)-301001. CUKE VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, ALWAR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA -@THVKBZVKJ LA -@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABCJ 8110 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJIV SOGANI (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT. RUNI PAL (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 07/09/2020 MN?KKS 'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/09/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 28/09/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT). THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,15,921/- IN RESPECT OF DEPRECIATION CLAIMED ON BUILDING WITHOUT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE EVIDENCES SUBMITTED PROVIDING THAT THE BUILDING ITA 1291/JP/2018_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE P LTD. VS ACIT 2 WAS PUT TO USE DURING THE SUBJECT YEAR. THE SAME IS TOTALLY AGAINST FACT AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 66,593/- IN DISALLOWING TDS DEMAND THE SAME TOTALLY AGAINST LAW AND FACTS. 3. THE APPELLANT RESERVES THE RIGHTS TO AMEND, ADD AND WITHDRAW THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONCLUDED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE IN VIEW OF THE PREVAILING SITUATION OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC. 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PERUSED. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 2,63,49,707/- IN THE BLOCK OF BUILDING, OUT OF WHICH ADDITION OF RS. 2,63,18,417/- WHICH WAS PUT TO USE ON 21/03/2014. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ON THE ADDITION SO MADE. THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE SAME, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). AGAINST WHICH, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. FROM THE RECORD, WE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE ADDITIONS TO THE BUILDING SITUATED AT PLOT A-97, MAIN ROAD, BHIWADI DISTRICT, ALWAR (RAJASTHAN) DURING THE SUBJECT ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR INR 2,63,49,707/-, OUT OF WHICH ADDITION, THE BUILDING OF INR 2,63,18,417/- WAS PUT TO USE ON 21 MARCH 2014. THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING WAS COMPLETED IN THE YEAR 2008 AS THE ASSESSEE HAD COMMENCED ITS BUSINESS ITA 1291/JP/2018_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE P LTD. VS ACIT 3 OPERATIONS AS MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED ('MSIL') DEALER IN THE SAID BUILDING PREMISES IN MAY 2008. SINCE THEN, THE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENTS WERE BEING CARRIED OUT AS PER THE INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDELINES PRESCRIBED BY MSIL. MSIL BEING A MARKET LEADER IN AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY AND ENJOYING GOOD MARKET REPUTATION, PRESCRIBES AND SPECIFIES THE OVERALL DESIGN OF THE SHOWROOM AND EXERCISES CONTROL OVER OTHER MINUTE DETAILS LIKE COLOUR OF WALLS, QUALITY OF FURNITURE FITTINGS USED ETC. AS MENTIONED ABOVE, A BASIC STRUCTURE REQUIRED FOR COMMENCEMENT OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS WAS ALREADY IN PLACE BY MAY 2008 AND POST THE SAME, ONLY ALTERATIONS/MODIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY MSIL FROM TIME TO TIME WERE MADE. SUCH ADDITIONS SO MADE DURING THE SUBJECT ASSESSMENT YEAR WERE IN THE NATURE OF ENHANCEMENTS AND MADE UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A COMPETENT ARCHITECT. 5. BEFORE THE A.O., THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED WITH THE BILLS / VOUCHERS, IN ORDER TO SUBSTANTIATE THE DATE OF ADDITIONS MADE TO THE BUILDING. THE AO HAS MADE DISALLOWANCES ON THE BASIS THAT THE COPY OF CONTRACT WITH THE LABOUR CONTRACTOR HAS NOT BEEN FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE FOUND THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE TO THE BUILDING PREMISES WERE IN THE NATURE OF ENHANCEMENTS AND MADE UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A COMPETENT ARCHITECT. COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES OBTAINED FROM ARCHITECT ITA 1291/JP/2018_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE P LTD. VS ACIT 4 AND ENGINEER NAMELY M/S AGARWAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND B.P. CONSTRUCTION, UNDER WHOSE SUPERVISION THE ADDITIONS TO BUILDING WERE MADE, WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. NOTHING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE A.O. TO CONTROVERT THE POSITIVE EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DISALLOWANCE OF ASSESSEES CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION. 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO AGITATED THE ADDITION OF RS. 66,593/- DISALLOWING TDS DEMAND. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE RECORDS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS GROUND SO RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN PART. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 TH SEPTEMBER, 2020. SD/- SD/- LANHI XLKA JES'K LH 'KEKZ (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (RAMESH C SHARMA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 08/09/2020 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, ALWAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, ALWAR. ITA 1291/JP/2018_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE P LTD. VS ACIT 5 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1291/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR