SANDEEP ACID CHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 238/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 September 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence as it was crucial to the depreciation claim. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination and adjudication of the issue.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the disallowance of additional depreciation on purchased plant and machinery. The assessee submitted additional evidence, including bills and ledger confirmations, which were not available during earlier proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether additional depreciation on plant and machinery can be allowed when the assessee provides crucial evidence at the appellate stage. The admissibility and examination of additional evidence by the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(iia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HONBLE & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HONBLE

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Aggarwal
For Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar singh
Hearing: 20.08.2019Pronounced: 30.09.2019

O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)–6, Mumbai [hereinafter for short “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 16.10.2017 for the A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

The only ground in the appeal of the assessee is in respect of sustaining the disallowance on additional depreciation on purchase of new plant and machinery.

(A.Y: 2013-14) M/s. Sandeep Acid Chem Private Limited 3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee furnished additional evidences in the form of copy of bills from M/s. S.P. Chemi Equipments and M/s. Fine Pack Structure Pvt. Ltd., and ledger confirmations to prove that the assessee made purchases of plant and machinery from those parties. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that copies of invoices could not be furnished before the lower authorities as the same were not traceable in the records of the assessee and subsequently some of the evidences were obtained from the parties and since these materials go to the root of the matter the same may be admitted and remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer for examination.

4.

Ld. DR has no serious objections in sending back the matter to the file of the assessing officer.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below. On a perusal of the additional evidences furnished before us, we are of the view that these evidences go to the root of the matter of allowance of depreciation on machinery, the same are admitted. These evidences have to be examined by the Assessing Officer as these evidences were not available for verification. Thus, we restore all these evidences and the issue in hand to the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee may file all

(A.Y: 2013-14) M/s. Sandeep Acid Chem Private Limited these evidences before the assessing officer to substantiate its claim. Needless to say that Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 30th September, 2019

More judgments on Section 32(1)(iia)

All 553 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(iia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →