Shri Ravinder Singh Raghav, Bhopal V. The ACIT 2(1), Bhopal

ITA 31/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5824 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: N D PATWA
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

[TYPE TEXT] RAVINDRASINGH RAGHAV ITA NO. 31/IND/2014 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.C. MEENA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 31/IND/2014 A.Y.2005-06 RAVINDER SINGH RAGHAV BHOPAL ::: APPELLANT VS ASSTT.COMMR. OF INCOME TAX 2(1) BHOPAL ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI ASHISH GOYAL & SHRI N.D. PATWA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 21 .12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 . 2 .201 6 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-I, BHOPAL, DATED 6.11.20 13. [TYPE TEXT] RAVINDRASINGH RAGHAV ITA NO. 31/IND/2014 2 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NO T JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ADDING RS.2,18,462/- ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION ON JCB MACHINE PURCHASED ON 29.3.2005. 3. IN THIS CASE THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED DECLARI NG INCOME AT RS.5,66,469/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED B Y ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE IS NOT ALLOWING DEPRECIATION OF RS.2,18,4 62/- ON JCB MACHINE WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED ON 29.3.2005. 4. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO PROOF OF DELI VERY OF JCB MACHINE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HE, THEREFORE, ADMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE [TYPE TEXT] RAVINDRASINGH RAGHAV ITA NO. 31/IND/2014 3 ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, HE PLEADED THAT THE DEPRECIATION MAY BE ALLOWED IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. SINCE THE LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED THAT THERE IS NO PROOF OF DELIVERY OF JCB MACHINE PRIOR TO 31 ST MARCH, 2005, THE ASSESSEE HAS NO CASE. WE, THEREFORE, ENDORSE THE ORDER S OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 2/2/ 2016 SD/- (B.C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 2/2/2016 DN/-