9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f depreciation - HELD THAT:- Since in A.Y 2010-11 [supra] we have treated the entire purchases of fixed assets as bogus, there is no question of any allowance of depreciation. In respect of other assets, we find that no supporting evidences have been furnished and, therefore, denial of depreciation is justified. Claim of expenditure - onus is upon the assessee to furnish necessary evidences in support of its claim of expenditure. Since no documentary evidences have been furnished, the addition on account of non availability of bills in respect of expenses is confirmed. Accordingly, all the Grounds raised by the assessee stand dismissed. - ITA No. 3156/DEL/2016 And ITA No. 3157/DEL/2016 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2020 - Shri Bhavnesh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... objections were dismissed by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 01.11.2012. The assessee once again fi led objections vide letter dated 06.11.2012, which were once again rejected by the Assessing Officer on 22.02.2013. Finally, the assessee submitted its return of income on 27.02.2013 declaring total income at Rs. NIL. Detailed questionnaires were issued and served upon the assessee. However, the assessee did not file any reply in response to these questionnaires. 6. The Assessing Officer proceeded to complete assessment as per material available on record and after analysing the seized material/documents, the Assessing Officer found that the entire share capital is hit by provisions of sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Assessee, condoned the delay and clearly held in the concluding Para that We do not see any merit in this special leave petition, which is hereby dismissed. 7.34.8.3 In the instant case, the Appellant Company failed to satisfy the primary requirements ie. the identification of the creditors/ shareholders, creditworthiness of creditors/ shareholder and the genuineness of the transaction, and failed miserably when not the matter was looked into in depth having regard to the human probabilities and normal course of human conduct. 7.34.9 In view of the factual matrix of the case and the Judicial decisions discussed above, it is obvious that the Appellant Company has failed to discharge the onus upon it and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... additions made towards Unaccounted Investment in the abovementioned three Properties amounting to ₹ 14,92,83,642/- are hereby confirmed. This Ground of Appeal is also rejected. 13. Addition on account of bogus purchases on fixed assets was confirmed as under: 7.36.5 During the Appellant proceedings also, the Assessee Company could not justify the claimed Purchases. It is seen that the Assessee Company was required to produce the Books of Account during the Assessment proceedings, but the same were not produced. Even during the Appellate proceedings, the Appellant had more than sufficient opportunity to produce the Books of Account and to justify and prove the genuineness of the claimed Purchases and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as unexplained Investment of the Assessee company is hereby confirmed. The Ground of Appeal No. 10 is rejected. 14. Since the fixed assets were treated as bogus, denial of depreciation was also confirmed. 15. We have carefully perused the findings of the ld. CIT(A). As mentioned elsewhere, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since nothing has been provided to us by the assessee, we decline to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Grounds raised by the assessee stand dismissed. ITA No. 3157/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2011-12] 16. First addition is on account of bogus claim of depreciation. Since in ITA No. 3156/DEL/2016 for A.Y 2010-11 we have confirmed the addition on accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
