Dholu Construction & Projects Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

MA 347/AHD/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5915 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 80IA; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) M.A.NO: 347/AHD/2019 (IN ITA NO. 3146/AHD/2016) & M.A.NO: 88/AHD/2020 ( IN ITA NO. 566/AHD/2017) (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 & 2011-12) DHOLU CONSTRUCTION & PROJECTS LTD. 401, GALA ARGOS, B/H HARIKRUPA TOWER, GUJARAT COLLEGE ROAD, ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD-380006 PAN NO. AABCD5760E THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD V/S V/S THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD DHOLU CONSTRUCTION & PROJECTS LTD. 401, GALA ARGOS, B/H HARIKRUPA TOWER, GUJARAT COLLEGE ROAD, ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD-380006 PAN NO. AABCD5760E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI BANDISH SOPARKAR & PARIN SHAH , A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI LALIT P. JAIN, SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER M.A. NO. 347/AHD/2019 & M.A. NO. 88/AHD/2020 . A.YS. 2013-14 & 2011-12 2 DATE OF HEARING : 16 -04-2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 -04-2021 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. M. A. NO. 347/AHD/2019 & 88/AHD/2020 HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE RESPECTIVELY. 2. THE ASSESSE HAS STATED THAT ITAT WHILE DECIDING ITANO. 3144 & 3145/AHD/2016 FILED BY THE ASSESSE AND ITA NO. 566 & 874/AHD/2017 HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE BUT ON ACCOUNT OF OVERSIGHT ITA NO. 3146/AHD/2016 HAS BEEN LEFT OUT TO BE ADJUDICATED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND IT APPEARS TO BE CASE OF INADVERTENT ERROR AND OF OVERSIGHT. HOWEVER, IN ITA NO. 3146/AHD/2016, ASSESSE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 4. SO FAR GROUND NO. 1 RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 3,90,342/- WITH REGARD TO COMMON EXPENSES TO WIND MILL PROJECT TO RESTRICT DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80IA(4) OF THE ACT IS CONCERNED, IN CONNECTED ITA NO. 3144 & 3145/AHD/2016 WE HAVE ALLOWED THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ORDER VIDE ITAT ORDER IN ITA NO. 3144 & 3145/AHD/2016 DATED 26.09.2019. THUS IN PARITY WITH THE SAID ORDER, WE ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 5. NOW WE COME TO GROUND NO. 2 RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,733/- DEPRECIATION FROM DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF COMBINED APPEAL, ASSESSE PREFERRED NOT TO PRESS THE SAME GROUND. THUS GROUND IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. M.A. NO. 347/AHD/2019 & M.A. NO. 88/AHD/2020 . A.YS. 2013-14 & 2011-12 3 7. NOW WE COME TO GROUND NO. 3 RELATING TO RESTRICTING DEPRECIATION ON HIRE AND HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES FROM 30% TO 15%. 8. IN CONNECTED ITA NO. 3144 & 3145/AHD/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 & 2012-13 ORDER DATED 26.09.2019 ALLOWED THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. THUS IN PARITY WITH THE SAID APPEALS, WE ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE. 9. NOW WE COME TO NEXT GROUND RELATING TO DEPRECIATION IS ALLOWABLE ON BLOCK OF ASSET AS IS ALLOWED ON BLOCK WHICH IS BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE PAST IS CONCERNED, LD. CIT(A) ALREADY GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AT PARA 36 ON PAGE 32 HIS ORDER. THUS SAME IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. NOW WE COME TO DEPARTMENTAL M.A. NO. 88/AHD/2020. 12. LD. D.R. DRAWN OUT ATTENTION IN OUR ORDER IN ITA NO. 566/AHD/2017 IN GROUND NO. 4 (BAD DEBTS), ALTHOUGH THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O IS ONLY RS. 27,70,229/-, BY ACCEPTING THE ALTERNATIVE PLEA OF THE ASSESSE, IN PARA 37 IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS THEREFORE, WE ACCEPT ALTERNATIVE PLEA OF THE ASSESSE OF RS. 30,47,275/- IS A BUSINESS LOSS. AS THE ADDITION WAS ONLY OF RS. 27,70,229/- ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, THERE SEEMS TO BE APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 13. AT PARA 37 ON PAGE NO. 20 OF ITA NO. 3144 & 3145/AHD/2016 AND ITA NO. 566 & 874/AHD/2017 TO BE READ AS FOLLOWS: WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS WE CAN SEE ABOVE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF BUSINESS ONLY. BECAUSE PERFORMANCE SECURITY WAS GIVEN FOR A CONTRACT BY THE ASSESSE AND NON RECEIPT OF AMOUNT FROM SALE OF SCRAP AND WITHOUT SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSESSE COULD NOT CARRY ON THE BUSINESS. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW RS. 22,70,229/- AS BUSINESS LOSS OF THE ASSESSE. M.A. NO. 347/AHD/2019 & M.A. NO. 88/AHD/2020 . A.YS. 2013-14 & 2011-12 4 14. IN THE RESULT, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 15. IN THE RESULT, BOTH MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22- 04- 2021 SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 22/04/2021 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHMEDABAD