Shamji Maya & Sons, Bhuj V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

ITA 186/RJT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0781 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट 瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ, , , , राजकोट IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT.SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.186/RJT/2018 Assessment Year :2013-14 M/s.Shamji Maya & Sons Narayan Chambers Bank of Baroda Building Station Road Bhuj-Kutch. Vs. The ITO, ward-2 Bhuj-Kutch. अपीलाथ / (Appellant) यथ /(Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld.AR Revenue by : Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld.Sr.DR स ु नवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 28/07/2022 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement: 03/08/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-2, Rajkot [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)”] under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) dated 13.11.2017 pertaining to the Asst.Year 2013-14. 2. At the outset itself, the ld.counsel for the assessee pointed out that there are two issues involved in the appeal; one relating to disallowance of depreciation on car on estimation basis for the reason that it must have been used for personal purpose of the ITA No.186/RJT/2018 2 partners of the assessee-firm. Other issue, he contended related to claim of set off of unabsorbed loss of preceding year. 3. Grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming addition of Rs.42,872/-. The addition needs deletion. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming addition of Rs.42,872/- in respect of depreciation on Motor Car. The addition needs deletion. 3. Taking into consideration the legal, statutory, factual, accounting and administrative aspects, no addition / disallowance amounting to Rs. 42,872/-, ought to have been confirmed. The additions need deletion. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the decisions of the Ld. A.O. mentioned at in passing order at page no. 3 last 3 lines of the assessment order that there is assessed income of Rs. 61,50,420/- for A.Y. 2012-13 hence no loss will be setoff in this year. This being erroneous needs deletion. 5. Without prejudice, the assessment made is bad in law and deserves annulment. 6. Without prejudice, no adequate, sufficient and reasonable opportunity has been provided at the time of assessment stage. The assessment needs annulment. 7. Without prejudice, no adequate, sufficient and reasonable opportunity has been provided at the time of appellate stage. The assessment needs annulment. 8. Without prejudice, no legal and statutory notice has been served on the assessee the assessment being bad in law deserves annulment. 9. The appellant craves leave to add/alter/amend and/or substitute any or all ground of appeal before the actual hearing takes place. 4. With regard to the issue of disallowance of depreciation on car on account of personal user ,raised vide ground No.1-3, the contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee was that there was no basis with the Revenue authorities to hold that the car had been used for personal purposes and the disallowance was based merely on surmises and conjectures. ITA No.186/RJT/2018 3 The ld.DR was unable to controvert the above contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee, though he relied on the order of the AO/CIT(A). 5. We have perused the order of the AO and we find that there is no basis given by the AO for his finding that the car was used for personal purposes also alongwith user in the business by the assessee. He merely states that personal user cannot be ruled out. No details have been called for ,nor any inquiry done on the issue by the AO. On the contrary the AO mentions the assessee producing all books of accounts and vouchers and he having test checked the same. Nothing adverse has been found by the AO in the books of the assessee also. The disallowance surely is purely adhoc. In view of the above, we see no reason to uphold the disallowance and we direct the deletion of the same. 6. With regard to ground relating to benefit of set off of brought- forward loss of preceding year, raised vide Ground No.4, the ld.counsel for the assessee pointed out that in the preceding year,i.e A.Y 2012-13, the assessee has returned huge losses, but on account of various additions made in the assessment framed for the said year, the entire losses were wiped off and income assessed at Rs.61,50,420. He pointed out from the assessment order that the AO gave no benefit of carry forward of loss noting none was available to the assessee. Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee had carried the matter, relating to the additions made in the preceding year, in appeal before the ld.CIT(A) which was pending. He stated therefore that in the circumstances, the assessee appeal is allowed, to the extent that losses are assessed in the said year, the assessee should be allowed carry forward and the ITA No.186/RJT/2018 4 set off the same in the impugned year. He prayed therefore for direction to the AO to the effect that benefit of brought forward assessed losses be given to the assessee. 7. The ld.DR fairly agreed with the same. 8. In view of the same, we direct the AO to grant benefit of set off of brought-forward losses if any as available as per law. Ground of appeal No.4 is allowed in above terms. 9. No other arguments were made by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee before us. The remaining effective grounds of appeal are accordingly dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Court on 3 rd August, 2022 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER