Chaudhary Attarsing Yadav Memorial Education Trust, Pune V. Income tax Officer,Central -1, Pune

ITA 99/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0014 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARISES OUT OF PASSED
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . / ITA NO.99/PUN/17 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 CHAUDHARY ATTARSINGH YADAV MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST, ON 7, 6 TH FLOOR, OFF NO.601 TO 603, OPP. SHRADDHA HERITAGE, BEHIND CENTRAL MALL, MORWADI, PIMPRI, PUNE 411 018 PAN : AAAAC2210P VS. ITO, CENTRAL -1, PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE CIT(A)-11, PUNE ON 18-10-2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI SUDHENDU DAS DATE OF HEARING 01-04-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02 -04-2019 ITA NO.99/PUN/2017 CHAUDHARY ATTARSINGH YADAV MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST 2 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.5,25,778/- MADE U/S.40A(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER ALSO CALLED `THE ACT). 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E INCURRED CERTAIN EXPENSES IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) MA DE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.5,25,778/- UNDER THE SECTION. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURN ISH ANY DETAILS WARRANTING NON-SUSTENANCE OF THE ADDITION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEV ANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. FIRST NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 26-09-2018 FIXING THE DATE OF HEARING ON 14-11-2018. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. N OTICE WAS AGAIN SENT BY REGISTERED POST FOR 03-01-2019. ON THAT DATE AGAIN NONE TURNED UP. ONCE AGAIN, NOTICE WAS ISSUED FOR 06-02-2019, WHICH ALSO REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. ANOTHER NOTICE WAS SENT FIXING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 01-04-201 9. TODAY AGAIN, NEITHER ANYONE HAS EITHER APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN FILED . ITA NO.99/PUN/2017 CHAUDHARY ATTARSINGH YADAV MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST 3 IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE OFF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 5. IT IS SEEN THAT THE AO MADE DISALLOWANCE U/S.40A(3) ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION COMING FORTH FROM THE SID E OF ASSESSEE EITHER BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW OR BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL JUSTIFYING THE NON-APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) TO THIS EXTENT, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THIS ACCOUNT. THIS GROUND FAILS. 6. THE ONLY OTHER ISSUE IN THE APPEAL IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION AT RS.27,75,51 8. THE FACTS APROPOS THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEPRECIATION OF RS.1.95 CRORE AND ODD. THE AO OBSERVE D THAT IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS DEPRECIATION WAS DISALLOWED ON CERTAIN ASSETS BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE THEIR ACQUISITION. FOLLOWING THE SIMILAR VIEW, THE AO COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE ON SUCH ASSETS FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATIO N AT RS.27,75,518/- AND MADE DISALLOWANCE. THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO ON THIS SCORE. ITA NO.99/PUN/2017 CHAUDHARY ATTARSINGH YADAV MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST 4 7. HAVING HEARD THE LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS SEEN THAT THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE THA T CERTAIN ASSETS ON WHICH DEPRECIATION WAS DISALLOWED, WERE ACTUALLY ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FURTHER SUBSTANTIATION OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE. THIS GROUND ALSO FAILS. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02 ND APRIL 2019. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESID ENT PUNE; DATED : 02 ND APRIL, 2019 ITA NO.99/PUN/2017 CHAUDHARY ATTARSINGH YADAV MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST 5 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEALS)-11, PUNE 4. 5. THE PR. CIT CENTRAL, PUNE , , B / DR B, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 01-04-2019 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 01-04-2019 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *