9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of the confirmations. Therefore, it is not as though the First Appellate Authority had given a positive direction to the Assessing Officer to accept the case of the petitioner insofar as with regard to the issue of depreciation on intangible assets as such. On the other hand, the order of remand clearly indicates that allowing of the depreciation software as claimed by the petitioner, is subject to the satisfactory verification of the confirmations by the Assessing Officer.Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned in this writ petition only on the reason that the petitioner is to avail an alternative remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority. - W.P.No.21266 of 2018 And WMP.No.24936 of 2018 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , by giving a direction to the Assessing Officer to appraise the evidences and verify the two confirmations from two companies viz., M/s.Hoteied PTE Limited, Singapore and M/s.Six Rivers Universal SA BVI. The First Appellate Authority also observed that subject to satisfactory verification of the confirmation, the Assessing Officer is to allow the depreciation software as claimed. Consequent, upon the order passed by the First Appellate Authority, as stated supra, the Assesee was called upon to appear before the Assessing Officer and furnish details and evidences for the claim of depreciation on intangible assets. The petitioner sent their reply on 18.04.2018. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed the present impugned order dated 24.04.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended that if the petitioner is aggrieved against the present order, impugned in this writ petition, it is open to them to challenge the same in the manner known to law, before the Appellate Authority, once again. 7. Heard both sides. 8. The petitioner is aggrieved against the dis-allowance of depreciation claim on intangible assets. No doubt that the petitioner has filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority and challenged the order of assessment in respect of the such dis-allowance. It is also true that the First Appellate Authority has allowed the appeal in part and directed the Assessing Officer to appraise the evidences and verify two confirmations from the said two companies and thereafter, to allow the depreciatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is to avail an alternative remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner as well as the findings rendered by the Assessing Officer in the impugned order, since it is for the next fact finding authority viz., the Appellate Authority to consider and decide on the same, on merits and in accordance with law. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such appeal is filed by complying with other statutory requirements, the Appellate Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
