Falcon Business Resources P.Ltd, New Delhi V. ACIT, Circle-9(2), New Delhi

ITA 6511/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1658 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 20

Judgement Text

ITA No.- 6511/Del/2019 M/s Falcon Business Resources P. Ltd. Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘B’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI GS PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 6511/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s Falcon Business Resources (P) Ltd., D-158 B, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi-110020. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 9(2), C.R. Building, New Delhi-110002. PAN No: AAACF8295M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None. Revenue by : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 21.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 13.06.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM 1. Heard and perused the record. 2. At the time of hearing, none has appeared. The record shows earlier also no one was appeared. The matter was earlier heard on 4.12.2023 but was subsequently released, and thereafter again ITA No.- 6511/Del/2019 M/s Falcon Business Resources P. Ltd. Page 2 of 3 notices were issued for 21.5.2024, wherein no one appeared. No more opportunity is justified. 3. Arguments of Ld. DR were heard. 4. It comes up that the Assessing Officer had made an addition by way of disallowance on account of difference in rate of depreciation upon Mobile phone and television which assessee had claimed at 60%. While Assessing Officer had restricted the same to 15% on the basis of Hon’ble Kerala High Court judgment in the case of Federal Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 20 taxmann.com 707. 5. However, before the CIT(A), the same was not countered by any other proposition of law, nor in the grounds raised before the Tribunal there is any averment of the Tax Authority below not considering the factual or legal aspect in regard to the issue. 6. In the light of aforesaid, the order of CIT(A) is upheld and the appeal is dismissed Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13.06.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (GS PANNU) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.- 6511/Del/2019 M/s Falcon Business Resources P. Ltd. Page 3 of 3 Dated: 13/06/2024. Pooja/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Date of dictation 5.6.24 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member 6.6.24 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order