M.Subramaniam (HUF), Salem V. ACIT, Salem

ITA 335/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90408 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N MADHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T S LAKSHMIVENKATARAMAN
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.335/MDS/2015 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 SH.M. SUBRAMANIAN (HUF), NO.169, C-2, THURAIYUR ROAD, NAMAKKAL. PAN : AACHM 0391 N V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE II, SALEM. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SH.T.S.LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN, CA -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SH.N. MADHAVAN, JCIT 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 12.05.2015 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.05.2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM, DA TED 30.12.2014 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN THIS APPEAL IS WI TH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON THE CAR ON ESTIMATE BASIS. 2 I.T.A. NO.335/MDS/15 2. SHRI T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN, THE LD. REPRESEN TATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION ON ESTIMATE BASIS. THE LD. REPRESENTA TIVE SUBMITTED THAT WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED 1/5 TH OF THE DEPRECIATION ON THE CAR. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE CAR WAS NOT USED FOR PERSONAL P URPOSE AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT REJECTED. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THERE IS NO QU ESTION OF ANY DISALLOWANCE. THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE ALSO PLACED R ELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN M. SELVAR AJ V. ACIT IN I.T.A. NOS.988 & 989/MDS/2014 DATED 30.01.2015. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI N. MADHAVAN, THE LD. DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A HU F. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED HIMSELF IN THE BUSINESS. THERE FORE, PERSONAL USE OF THE CAR FOR THE MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY CANNOT BE RULED OUT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS REASONABLY ESTI MATED THE DISALLOWANCE AT 1/5 TH OF THE CAR MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THIS TRIB UNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI M. SELVARAJ (SUPRA) HAD AN OCCASION TO CONS IDER AN IDENTICAL ISSUE. THIS TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS NOT 3 I.T.A. NO.335/MDS/15 POINTED OUT ANY DEFECTS IN THE ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS FOUND THA T THE AD-HOC DISALLOWANCE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. ONE OF US, THE A CCOUNTANT MEMBER IS A PARTY TO THE ABOVE ORDER. THEREFORE, B Y FOLLOWING THE ABOVE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND THE REASONING STAT ED THEREIN, THIS THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE RE CANNOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE ON ESTIMATE BASIS IN THE ABSENCE OF AN Y MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT THE CAR WAS USED FOR PERSONAL PURPOSE. A CCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE AND T HE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE ENTIRE CLAIM OF DE PRECIATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 29 TH MAY, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 29 TH MAY, 2015. KRI. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: +, /APPELLANT / -.+, /RESPONDENT / 1 92 ) /CIT(A), SALEM / 1 92 /CIT, SALEM / 7: -2 /DR / ( ; /GF.