9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 455X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginal assessment was completed determining total income of Rs. 38,31,380 by the Assessing Officer. The assessee company carried the matter before the CIT(A), who disposed of the appeal after giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) and the total income of the assessee company was revised to (-) Rs. 19,83,219. Being aggrieved, the Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, in turn, set aside the following issues to the file of Assessing Officer for deciding the same afresh : (i)Addition of Rs. 47,33,390 made on account of depreciation on wind farm plant; and (ii)Disallowance of expenses of Rs. 7,82,967 on foreign travel. 3. The first dispute is with regard to disallowance of Rs. 47,33,390 on account of depreci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of the successful commissioning stated as 27-3-1995. (vii)Copy of the certificate issued by the GEDA dated 1-6-1995 wherein it is certified that WTGS were commissioned on 27-3-1995. (viii)Copy of form for test report wherein date of the commencement is dated as 5-2-1995 and completion of the same as 11-3-1995. The form is signed by Hemendra Enterprise, Porbander, who was registered electric contractor and supervisor. 5. The CIT(A), considering the submissions made by the assessee and on perusal of the records available before him, held that the assessee, though installed the wind mill and the same was not connected to grid during the previous year relevant to assessment year under consideration, in the absence of the connection to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecific dates, (c) persons travelling with their designation, (d) purpose of visit, (e) relevant facts and figures so as to enable the undersigned to work out the proportion as referred to in clause (i) of rule 6D of the Act. 9. The Assessing Officer, however, rejected the submissions of the assessee on the above context because the specific details as called for which were required to be furnished as per the directions of the Tribunal, have not been furnished by the assessee company and, therefore, held that the expenditures incurred of Rs. 7,82,967 were not related to the business of the assessee and have not been incurred for the purpose of business. 10. The matter was carried in appeal before the CIT(A), who confirmed the disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etion of addition made of Rs. 2,98,246 on account of disallowance of vehicle expenses. 13. Here, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of assessee stating that, as the specific details were not provided by the assessee, therefore, the expenses are considered to be not related to the business of the assessee and are not incurred for the purpose of business. The CIT(A), following the decision of the Gujarat High Court, in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT [2002] 253 ITR 749 (Guj.), held that the issue is squarely applicable to the facts of the assessee's case as the directors were authorized to use the vehicles of the company. 14. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. We find that the issue stands cove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
