9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, proved that assessee company discontinued its business permanently and through the execution of LLP agreement dated 20th September, 2011, the assessee company has become partner in the new LLP. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the activities of the assessee were finally stopped in September, 2011 when the assessee become partner in some other concern though for the same activities. Therefore, the expenditure were rightly allowed in the case of the assessee company till the closure of the business i.e., September, 2011. The depreciation was also therefore, correctly allowed for half of the year i.e., up-to September, 2011 when business of the assessee company was completely stopped. Merely new LLP has sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further noted that assessee had claimed liability of ₹ 3,60,000 and ₹ 555 on account of security fees. The A.O. asked the assessee to give complete names and postal addresses of the persons pertaining to this security fees wherever the fees was more than two years old. The A.O. asked the assessee as to why the same may not be disallowed. The assessee in reply submitted the names of the students from whom security was claimed to have been received but no postal address was given. The assessee submitted that security fees was more than three years old and had been taken as liability by way of abundant precaution. The assessee further submitted that this amount has been taken as income during the next financial year. The A.O. was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of the assessee was finally stopped in September, 2011, so depreciation is allowable only for half of the year. Accordingly, 50% of the depreciation is also allowed. The Ld. CIT(A) also confirmed addition of ₹ 3,60,000. 7. After considering the rival contentions, I do not find any justification to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) allowed deduction/ expenditure of ₹ 1,38,585 which have been claimed in the P L A/c (Paper Book-4) therefore, on the same analogy, the depreciation for full year should have been allowed. He has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee has temporarily suspended its activities in the year 2009-2010. He referred to paper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the new LLP. It was, therefore, proved that assessee company discontinued its business permanently and through the execution of LLP agreement dated 20th September, 2011, the assessee company has become partner in the new LLP. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the activities of the assessee were finally stopped in September, 2011 when the assessee become partner in some other concern though for the same activities. Therefore, the expenditure were rightly allowed in the case of the assessee company till the closure of the business i.e., September, 2011. The depreciation was also therefore, correctly allowed for half of the year i.e., up-to September, 2011 when business of the assessee company was completely stopped. Mere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
