9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alled by the ITAT vide order dated 26th April, 2013 in M.A. No.247/Del/2012. Thereafter, the appeal was fixed for hearing on 7th November, 2013. The assessee's counsel sought for adjournment and, at assessee's request, hearing was adjourned to 27th February, 2014 and the next date of hearing was duly noted by the assessee's counsel. However, on 27th February, 2014, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request is made seeking adjournment. In view of the above facts, we are left with no alternative but to decide the appeal filed by the assessee ex parte. 3. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:- "1. Action of CIT(A) in confirming the action of AO in passing the order u/s 143(3) of the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,229/-. The bills/vouchers of these expenses were examined on test check basis. It is seen that some of these vouchers are self generated bills/vouchers which are countersigned by the other party. In some cases, these are not signed. Considering the large quantum of such bills into consideration, it would not be difficult for this expenditure to be inflated. Since these expenses are represented by self made vouchers, these are not amenable to scientific verification. Moreover, these expenses could not be said to be wholly substantiated in the form of self made vouchers. In view of the above, 2% of the above expenses of Rs.11,74,64,736/- amounting to Rs.23,49,294/- is hereby disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. Since the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I therefore uphold the addition made by the AO disallowing 2% of expenditure incurred on repairs and maintenance and spare parts consumed. The addition of Rs.23,49,294/- is confirmed. This ground is ruled against the appellant." 6. At the time of hearing before us, none appeared. Therefore, we have heard the learned DR and perused the material placed before us. After considering the arguments of learned DR and the facts of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A). The Assessing Officer has recorded the finding that some vouchers/bills are only self-generated vouchers. Therefore, he disallowed only 2% of the expenses incurred. The CIT(A) wanted to verify the expenses. He asked the assessee to produce the vouche ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
