IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JM) ITA NO. 6894 /MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2011 - 12 ITO 17 (3) (1), ROOM NO. 125, 1 ST FLOOR, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, G - BLOCK, BKC, MUMBAI - 400051 VS. M/S R.B.B.R. EXPORTS, SONAWALA BLDG., 2 ND FLOOR, 65 BOMBAY SAMACHAR MARG, FORT, MUMBAI - 400023 PAN: AAEFR3930J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI SHIDDARAM A PPA (DR) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARI NG : 24 /05 /202 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 / 0 6 /202 1 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.08.2019 OF LEARNED COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 28 , MUMBAI FOR TH E A SSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 . 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF DISPUTE, I PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE , QUA THE ASSESSEE , AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE AND BASED ON MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3. THE DISPUTE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS CONFINED TO ALLOWANCE OF ASSESSEES CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION. 4 . BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM. FOR THE IMPUGNED YEAR THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF IN COME ON 28.09.2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 13,37,250/ - . ASSESSMENT IN CASE OF THE ASSES SEE WAS ORIGINALLY COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 2 ITA NO. 6894 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 11 - 1 2 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.17,87,251/ - , WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECTIFIED TO R S. 13,37,251/ - . IN OTHER WORDS, TH E RETURN OF INCOME WAS ACCEPTED. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) HAVING FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WRONGLY CLAIMED DEPRECIATION OF RS. 2,09,102/ - ON MOTOR CAR , SOUGHT TO RECTIFY THE PURPORT ED MISTAKE BY ISSUING N OTICE UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED PURCHASE INVOICES OF THE MOTOR CAR ALONG WITH INSURANCE DOCUMENTS. AS OBS ERVED BY THE AO, THE MOTOR CAR WAS FOUND TO BE REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF AN INDIVIDUAL AND N OT IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM. THUS, ULTIMATELY HE PASSED AN ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT DISALLOWING THE DEPRECIATION OF RS. 2,09,102/ - . THE ASSESSEE CONTESTED THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE BY FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) . A CCEPT ING THE CON TENTION OF THE ASSESSEE, LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPE ALS) ALLOWED DEPRECIATION . 4. I HAVE CONSI DERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AS COULD BE SEEN FROM THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY THE ASS ESSEE BEFORE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), THE PAYMENT TOWARDS PURCHASE OF THE SUBJECT MOTOR VEHICLE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT THE VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED FOR ASSESSEE S BUSINESS AND WAS ALSO USED FOR ASSESSEE S BUSINESS. IN FACT, THE VEHICLE APPEARS AS AN ASSET IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, MERELY BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WAS REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF ONE OF THE PARTNER S, CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE DENIED . MORE SO, WHEN THE AO HAS NOT RAISED ANY DOUBT REGARDING THE SOURC E OF PAYMENT MADE FOR PURCHASE OF VEHICLE AND USER OF THE VEHICLE BY THE ASSESSEE . F OR MERE TECHNICAL REASON THAT IT IS REGISTERE D IN THE NAME OF THE PARTNER, CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE DENIED. THEREFORE, I AGREE WITH THE DECISION OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED . 3 ITA NO. 6894 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 11 - 1 2 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE , 2021 . SD/ - (SAKTIJIT DEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 25 / 06 /202 1 ALINDRA, PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI