9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 698X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O had relied on NHB reports which were never given to the assessee for his response or submissions. The mandate of principles of natural justice is thus violated in this case. In view thereof, in the interest justice, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this ground and remand the issue back to the file of the A.O to re-adjudicate as per law while complying with the principles of natural justice. Disallowance of 20% of depreciation on luxury cars - AO observed that the assessee was not having any business income during the year. However, he claimed huge depreciation on the luxury cars such as BMW, ETC. No log book was also maintained - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O and even before us, the assessee was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss of the assessee. In such a scenario, the decision of the subordinate authorities is held to be correct. Ground No. 4, therefore, dismissed. - ITA No. 701/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2022 - SHRI R. S. SYAL , VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY , JM For the Appellant : Suyog Bhave For the Respondents : M. G. Jasnani ORDER Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury , JM This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Pune dated 18-11-2016 for the Assessment Year 2012-13 raising following grounds of appeal. (1) The Hon. CIT(A) erred in, a. disallowing agriculture income of ₹ 3,01,781/- b. In unilaterally deciding the issue of disallowance of agricu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed down due to extraneous reasons is totally unjustified. d. Not following the judgment of The Hon. CIT(A) - 3, Pune in assessment Year 2009-10, wherein he allowed the similar expenses incurred on account of legal and professional expenses. 5) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 2. The relevant facts are that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of real estate including trading in TDR and shares. The assessee filed his return of income on 30-9-2012 showing total income at ₹ 9,16,49,628/- which was subsequently revised on 15-3-2013 declaring total income at ₹ 10,16,49,630/-. The assessment was completed on 24-3-2015 determining tota ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.R further prayed that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the A.O to re-adjudicate the matter as per law considering the decision of Hon'ble Orissa High Court (supra) while applying the principles of natural justice. The learned DR fairly conceded to these submissions of the assessee. In the aforesaid referred judgment, the facts were that the assessee had filed Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Orissa High Court on the ground that during the assessment proceedings, the A.O has made additions u/s. 40A(3) of the Act on account of cash purchases relying upon various documents/reports which were never confronted to the assessee nor copies were furnished to the assessee. It was the contention of the Revenue that the reports ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rding his submissions, this ground is dismissed as not pressed. 6. In ground No. 3, the assessee is aggrieved with the disallowance of 20% on luxury cars. The A.O observed that the assessee was not having any business income during the year. However, he claimed huge depreciation on the luxury cars such as BMW, ETC. No log book was also maintained. The A.O therefore, disallowed 20% of depreciation claimed on such vehicles u/s. 38(2) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) vide para 9.1 observed that there was no business carried out by the assessee during the year, neither has maintained any log book to co-relate the use of vehicles for business purposes. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O and even before us, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n method and no income has been offered during the year. Therefore, ₹ 15,08,770/- is added back in the income of assessee. 6. That, before the learned CIT(A) the assessee has made detailed written submissions which were considered and thereafter at para 10.2, the learned CIT(A) has held that the A.O has clearly mentioned that there was no business co-relation between the legal expenses claimed and the business of the assessee. That on perusal of some of the sample bills, it is seen that majority of the payments have been made to M/s. Vidhi Partners for handling various writ petitions. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee has failed to bring any evidence which could prove that the same were related wholly and exclusively ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
