Dr. Narayan T. Baddi, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT., Cent.Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 1541/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9944 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 15-09-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : A BENCH : AHMEDABA D (BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA, J.M. & HONBLE S HRI N.S. SAINI, A.M.) I.T.A. NO. 1541/AHD./2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-2005 DR. NARAYAN T. BADDI, AHMEDABAD -VS.- AS SISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (PAN : ADNPB 9177 F) CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDA BAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.K. DHANESTA, D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI T.K. SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 13.03.2008 OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, AHMEDABAD F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS AP PEAL ARE AS UNDER :- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN PASSING THE A PPELLATE ORDER WITHOUT PROPER APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS, SUBMISSIONS AND L EGAL POSITION AS WELL AS ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILE D DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL. THUS, THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER REQUIRES TO BE QUASHED AND/OR SET-ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICAT ION AFTER CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE FACTS AND ARGUMENTS IN RESPECT OF EACH OF T HE ADDITION/DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING T HE ADDITION OF RS,94,246/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF FACTORY EXPENSES ON THE GROUND THAT NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED O UT BY THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS MADE, THE IMPUGNE D ADDITION OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN DELETED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E ADDITION OF RS.65,6L9/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF PERSONNEL EXPENSES AND FURTHER DISALLOWING RS.55,089/- OUT OF THE SAID EXP ENSES WHICH WERE ALREADY ALLOWED BY THE A.O. ON THE GROUND THAT NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND SUBM ISSIONS MADE, THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.65,619/- AND ENHANCED ADDIT ION OF RS.55,089/- REQUIRES TO BE DELETED. 2 ITA NO. 1541/AHD/2008 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,55,659/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DISALL OWANCE OUT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES AND FURTHER DISALLOWING RS. 1,00,674/- OUT OF THE SAID EXPENSES WHICH WERE ALREADY ALLOWED BY THE A.O . ON THE GROUND THAT NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE AP PELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS MADE, THE IMPUGNED ADDITION O F RS.1,55,659/- AND ENHANCED ADDITION OF RS.1,00,674/- REQUIRES TO BE D ELETED. 5. THE LEARNED C1T(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON ELECTRIC INSTALL ATION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.26,95L/- MADE BY THE A.O. AND FURTHER DISALLOWAN CE OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.1,61,030/- NOT DISALLOWED BY THE A.O. ON THE GRO UND THAT NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS MADE, THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE OF DEPR ECIATION OF RS.26,951/- AND ENHANCED DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,61,03 0/- REQUIRES TO BE DELETED. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND THAT THE C ONTROVERSY INVOLVED IN THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVEN UE BY THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2010 OF ITAT, A BENCH, AHMEDABAD IN ITA NO. 162/AHD/2007 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. IN THE SAID ORDER, ITAT, AHMED ABAD HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION DATED 10.07.2009 OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IN ITA NO. 1082/AHD/2006. THE OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL IS C ONTAINED IN PARA 7, WHICH IS AS UNDER :- '7. IN THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION, BOTH THE AO A ND THE ID. CIT(A) CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSES FAILED TO PLACE ON RECO RD ANY MATERIAL TO ESTABLISH THAT EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED WHOLLY ARID EXCLUSIVE LY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. EVEN BEFORE US, THE SITUATION IS NO BETTE R. ONLY INCOME IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST OF RS .5,08,205/- ON FDRS AND INSURANCE CLAIM OF RS. 18,500/-. THE ID AR ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT REFERRED US TO ANY MATERIAL SUGGESTING THAT THE AFO RESAID EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSES IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, OR FOR EA RNING INTEREST INCOME ON FDRS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REASONS FOR TAKING A DI FFERENT VIEW IN THE MATTER AND IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID DECISIONS, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, GROUND NOS. 2 TO 4 IN THE APPEAL ARE DISMISSED'. . 3 ITA NO. 1541/AHD/2008 4. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE, FOLLOWING THE DECI SION DATED 26.04.2010 OF ITAT, A BENCH, AHMEDABAD IN ITA NO. 162/AHD/2007 FOR THE EA RLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA), REJECT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15.09.201 0. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (T.K. SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 15 / 09 / 2010 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE DEPARTMENT. 3) CIT(A.) CONCERNED, (4) CIT CONCERNED, (5) D.R. , ITAT, AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGIS TRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD LAHA/SR.P.S.