M/s. Parikh Enterprises, Burhanpur V. The ITO, Burhanpur

ITA 440/IND/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0085 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2009
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA KARAN
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE (S.M.C.-I) BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER PAN NO. : AABFM7868F I.T.A.NO.440/IND/2009 A.Y. : 2006-07 M/S. PARIKH ENTERPRISES, ITO SUNARPATTI, BURHANPUR, VS WARD BURHANPUR BURHANPUR APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI AVINASH GAUR, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SMT.APARNA KARAN, ADDL. CIT DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) II, INDORE, DATED 29 TH JUNE,2009, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PA RTIES, GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND PERUSE D THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS. 4934/- OUT OF DEPRECIATION ON SCOOTER AND VEHICLE. - 2 - 2 4. THE ASSESSEE IS A FIRM. THE A.O. NOTED THAT PERSONA L USER OF THE VEHICLE CANNOT BE DENIED AND, ACCORDINGLY, 20% EXPE NDITURE WAS DISALLOWED FOR PERSONAL USE OF THE VEHICLE AND DEPRECIATION WA S ALSO DISALLOWED ACCORDINGLY. THE LD. CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO 15%. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, IT IS CLEAR TH AT THE A.O. HAS MADE AD HOC ADDITION, BECAUSE THE A.O. HAS NO WHERE STATED THAT THE VEHICLES HAVE BEEN USED PERSONALLY BY THE PARTNERS. FIRM IS A ARTIFICIAL PERSON AND CANNOT HAVE PERSONAL USER OF THE VEHICLE. IN THE AB SENCE OF SPECIFIC FINDING AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, SUCH A DISALLOWANCE COULD NOT BE MADE. I, ACCORDINGLY, SET-ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND D ELETE THE ENTIRE ADDITION. THIS GROUND OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. 6. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CHALLENGED THE ADDITION OF RS. 7740/- OUT OF PACKING MATERIAL AND FOLDING EXPENSES. THE A.O. NOT ED THAT THE EXPENDITURE ARE NOT VERIFIABLE AND NO EVIDENCE LIKE VOUCHERS ET C. ARE KEPT OR MAINTAINED. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT ON EXAMINATION OF TH E VOUCHERS, IT WAS FOUND THAT SOME WERE SELF MADE WITHOUT ANY CORRESPONDING EVIDENCE. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC DETAIL S AND SUPPORTING VOUCHERS, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE JUSTIFIED IN MAKING PART DISALLOWANCE. THIS ADDITION IS, THEREFORE, CONFIRMED AND THIS GROUND O F APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. - 3 - 3 7. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY A LLOWED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. SD/- BHAVNESH SAINI JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. CPU* 17179