Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (4) TMI 873 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963.
2. Disallowance of depreciation claim on fixed assets.
3. Further disallowance of depreciation by the FAA.
4. Disallowance of business expenses incurred through credit card.

Issue 1: Admission of Additional Evidence
The assessee filed an appeal challenging the order of CIT(A)-18, Mumbai. The assessee requested to admit additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963, related to invoices of fixed assets purchased. The AR stated that due to a change in management, all evidence could not be produced earlier. The ITAT admitted the additional evidence as crucial for the case.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Depreciation Claim
The AO disallowed a depreciation claim of ?29.65 lakhs on certain additions to fixed assets due to lack of evidence. The FAA upheld the disallowance as the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence despite opportunities. The ITAT decided to restore the matter to the FAA for fresh adjudication, considering the additional evidence produced before them.

Issue 3: Further Disallowance of Depreciation
The FAA made a further disallowance of ?15.45 lakhs on depreciation. The ITAT, after restoring the matter to the FAA for fresh adjudication, decided this issue in favor of the assessee, in part.

Issue 4: Disallowance of Business Expenses
The AO disallowed business expenses of ?93,945 incurred through credit card based on AIR statement. The FAA upheld the disallowance as the assessee failed to provide complete documentary evidence. The ITAT also upheld this decision, stating that the bank statement did not sufficiently prove the business purpose of the expenditure.

In conclusion, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, with different issues being decided in favor of the assessee or the revenue authorities based on the evidence and submissions presented during the proceedings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates