9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y affirmed. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is thus, dismissed. Disallowance of depreciation on electricity installations - as per DR Electricity installations are of different rate of depreciation - Assessee submitted electricity installations are being integral part of the plant machinery. Therefore, the depreciation should be allowed as a plant machinery - HELD THAT:- In the case in hand, the assessee failed to bring on record, any evidences in support of its contention that the electricity installations were integral part of the plant machinery. On the contrary, it is brought on record that the electricity installations were separate from the plant machinery. No reason to interfere in the findings of authorities below, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT-A erred in sustaining the order passed by Ld AO u/s 143(3) without appreciating that the depreciation of 34,876/-on account of electric installation is an integral part of plant and machinery. 3) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT-A erred in sustaining the order passed by Ld AO u/s 143(3) without appreciating that the creditors have already submitted their confirmations in response to notices u/s 133(6) and; the payment to the creditors have been made in next years; and the liability to the payments have not ceased exist, and liability to the creditors have been duly acknowledged in books of accounts; There is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lf of the assessee and filed various details before the Assessing Authority. The Assessing Authority thereafter, framed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2017 by making addition on account of bad debts of INR 12,60,319/- and disallowance of expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act on adhoc basis amounting to INR 4,20,009/-. Further, the AO made disallowance of depreciation in respect of electricity installation amounting to INR 34,876/- and a sum of INR 44,70,124/- on account of unexplained creditors. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Thereby, Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition of depreciation and addition on ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be allowed as a plant machinery. 11. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and contented that there is no ambiguity under law. Electricity installations are of different rate of depreciation and the authorities below have rightly disallowed the claim. 12. We have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. In the case in hand, the assessee failed to bring on record, any evidences in support of its contention that the electricity installations were integral part of the plant machinery. On the contrary, it is brought on record that the electricity installations were separate from the plant machinery. Therefore, we do not find any reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven a finding on facts by observing as under on these three creditors:- ii) M/s Lalit Wafers and Namkeen (Rs. 1,52,000/- cr) The appellant furnished the confirmation from Sh. Lalit Arora, Prop. M/s Lalit Wafers and Namkeen along with his ITR during the assessment proceedings. From the perusal of the same it was noted by the AO that Sh. Lalit Arora has not shown any income from M/s Lalit Wafers. On the basis of such facts the AO treated M/s Lalit Wafers as bogus creditor and made addition of Rs. 1,52,000/-. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant relied upon the same documents which were furnished before the AO. The appellant could not bring on record any satisfactory document to establish the genuineness of the said cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The onus was upon the appellant to explain nature of such credit outstanding in its books of accounts. The appellant has failed to do so. Keeping in view the above facts and discussion it is held that the AO was justified in making addition of Rs. 10,78,792/-, the same is hereby confirmed. (iv) M/s Accurate Tools Pvt. Ltd. (Rs. 1,05,952/-cr) The appellant has furnished details of trade receivable part of balance sheet of M/s Accurate Tools. However, the AO observed that the appellant has produced false document which had been fabricated. Therefore, the AO treated the said creditor as bogus. During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. AR had furnished certain documents like tax invoices and registration under GST of the said entity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
