SAFIKAHMED MEHAMUDALI ANSARI,JITU BHAGAT COMPOUND vs. I.T.O. WARD 6(1)(1), INCOME TAX OFFICE VEJALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1455/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 November 2024AY 2018-19Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the depreciation claim was not allowed due to a mistake. It remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the claim, considering its allowance in earlier and subsequent years, and pass an order under Section 154.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of a depreciation claim of Rs. 20,63,673/- for AY 2018-19. The assessee argued that depreciation was allowed in preceding and succeeding years, and the disallowance was due to a mistake.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of depreciation claim was justified, and if the matter should be remanded for re-examination due to a mistake in the claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Chirag R. Shah, AR
For Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR
Hearing: 19.11.2024Pronounced: 22.11.2024

(Assessment Year: 2018-19) Safikahmed Mehamudali Ansari, Income Tax Officer, Vs. L-190, Jitu Bhagat Compound, Ward 6(1)(1), Opp. Shahalam, Dalilimda, Vejalpur, Gujarat-380028 Ahmedabad PAN : AAZPA 8241 L (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Chirag R. Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR Date of Hearing 19.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 22.11.2024 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT :

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 30.07.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “1 The assessment order passed u/s 154 of Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the first appellate authority u/s 250 is bad in law and deserved to be uncalled for.

2 The assessing officer as well as first appellate authority has erred in law and on facts in making the addition of Rs. 20,63,673/- by disallowing the depreciation claim. The same deserves to be deleted.”

3.

At the time of hearing before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim of depreciation for which the assessee is eligible has been allowed in the preceding year as well as in the succeeding year. It was submitted that the depreciation was not allowed owing to mistake in the claim of depreciation. Hence, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer to examine the claim of depreciation considering the fact of allowing the same in the earlier and succeeding years, and to pass an order under Section 154 in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 22.11.2024

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →