GLOBAL VISION SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ORDER

PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 05.02.2018 passed by CIT(A)-2, Kolkata for AY 2011-12 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) on the following grounds:-

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of A.O. who proceeded on erroneous belief and misconception of law in holding that the appellant had incurred cost of stamp paper (Rs.5000/-) and advocate fee (Rs.28,021/-) aggregating to Rs.33,021/-.

3. That on the facts and int eh circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by A.O. to the tune of Rs.48,035/- out of Travelling and conveyance expenses.

4. That the appellant craves leave to add, adduce, alter or amend any ground or grounds on or before the date of hearing.”

2. After hearing rival contentions, I hold as follows:- Regarding the disallowance of the claim of depreciation on office premises, on the ground that, the assessee has not put the same to use for more than Year: 2011-12] 180 days, the assessee produced a copy of Electricity bills as evidence of use. Ld.CIT(A) was of the view that, as the assessee has purchased furniture after 13.09.2010, there is no scope of using building prior to October 2010. Before us, the assessee has not produced any evidence to controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, this ground of the assessee is dismissed.

3. Ground No.2 is dismissed as not pressed.

4. Ground No.3 is against the travelling and convenience expenses disallowed on adhoc basis.

5. After going through the order of lower authorities, I find no reason to interfere in this order. Hence, I dismiss this ground of the assessee.