9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (7) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er having confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on building at Bijawasan Garden, New Delhi, and on electric and water installations therein, the Tribunal was justified in restoring the issue to the Income-tax Officer and in directing that in case, on some fresh evidence, the Income-tax Officer thinks otherwise, he may re-examine the issue ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that extra-shift allowance equal to normal depreciation should be allowed for the full year in respect of the assets which were used during the year for more than 30 days but less than 180 days ? " The brief facts of the case as found by the Tribunal are that an expenditure of Rs. 4,67,250 was cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee could not show that during the relevant assessment year the employees of the assessee along with their families visited the said garden. The maintenance of such garden at such a huge cost was considered to be inexpedient. It was open to the general public and was not connected or related to the business of the assessee and was not even necessary for the purpose of the business of the assessee. The utility and usefulness of the said garden to the assessee could not be inferred from the record, it was considered that the expenditure pertaining to this garden was rightly disallowed and such disallowance was correctly confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The assessee contended that the entire evidence could not be plac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... So far as questions Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, it may be observed that the Tribunal has power under the Income-tax Rules to take fresh evidence or it may direct the Income-tax Officer to take evidence if the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence. Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, reads as under: " 29. The parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence either oral or documentary before the Tribunal, but if the Tribunal requires any documents to be produced or any witness to be examined or any affidavit to be filed to enable it to pass orders or for any other substantial cause, or, if the income-tax authorities have decided the case without giving suffi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may adduce. The assessee had opportunity to adduce evidence even before the Tribunal. No such evidence was produced. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal was not justified to permit the assessee to produce further evidence and to send the case back to the Income-tax Officer for examination of evidence. We are further of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in restoring the issue to the Income-tax Officer and in directing that in case on some fresh evidence, the Income-tax Officer thinks otherwise, he may re-examine the issue. So far as question No. 3 is concerned, it has already been decided by this court in the case of the assessee in D. B. Income-tax Reference No. 30 of 1983 (CIT v. Jaipur Udyog Ltd. decided on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
