TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t : Shri B. Satyanarayana Murthy For the Respondent : Shri M. H. Naik ORDER Per Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member:- This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-IV, Hyderabad dated 30/09/2010 for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The assessee has raised five grounds. Ground No. 1 being general in nature, no adjudication is required. The learned AR at the outset submitted that he does not want to press ground Nos. 4 5, therefore, the same are dismissed as not pressed. 3. In Ground Nos. 2 3 the assessee has challenged the disallowance of write off of work-in-progress amounting to Rs. 15,29,600/-. 4. Briefly the facts relating to the issue in dispute are, the assessee company is engaged in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... written off. The Assessing Officer did not accept the claim of the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee neither produced any correspondence with the customer nor any cancellation order to prove that the orders were discontinued or cancelled by the customer. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee company having incurred substantial expenditure for execution of the orders given by the customers may not write off the amount without pursuing the same and without making any correspondence. Ultimately the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee in absence of any evidence. 5. The assessee being aggrieved of the rejection of the claim of write off filed an appeal before the CIT(A). 6. Before the first appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in reality the assessee is not in a position to realize the amount as it has not been billed. The learned AR submitted that due to reasons beyond its control it could not produce evidence towards discontinuance or cancellation of the orders by the customers. However, the details of the customers were submitted before the Assessing Officer. 9. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that since the assessee was not able to produce any evidence that the customers have discontinued or cancelled their orders with the assessee the claim of write off of the work-in-progress was disallowed by the lower authorities. However, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that if the assessee is able to produce evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
