Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2019 (9) TMI 763 - AT - Income TaxMaintainability of appeal - low tax effect - monetary limit - HELD THAT - There is no dispute as to the applicability of the Circular No. 17 of 2019 on pending appeals and thus tax effect involved in the appeal being less than the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 50 Lakhs the Department was required to withdraw this appeal or not pressed if not falling under exclusion provided in para 10 of circular No. 3/2018 as amended on 20/08/2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous with liberty to file application for recall if found to be covered by the exceptions provided in Circular No.3/2018 as amended on 20/08/2018. Addition towards Chilling Charge - assessee procured milk from villagers and before processing in its factory the milk was sent for chilling process - whether expenses are genuine and incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the assessee? - HELD THAT - Assessee neither could substantiate the variation in chilling charges from Rs. 0.10 to Rs. 0.25 along with any supporting evidences nor could rebut the finding of the CIT(A). Explanation furnished by the appellant appear to be lame excuses in order to somehow justify the increase. Apart from giving such vague and unsubstantiated excuses the appellant has not brought any material on record to justify the increase. Assessee could not justify as why huge sums of cash payments have been made to the industrial units engaged in chilling process. - Decided against assessee Disallowance for depreciation on Tetra Pack machine - as per DR this machine was received on 03/10/2005 and therefore it was put to use by the assessee for less than 180 days and thus assessee was entitled for half of the depreciation admissible for the entire year - HELD THAT - On being specifically asked by the Bench to the assessee to submit any evidence of machinery put to use or ready to put to use before 30th September 2005 he expressed his inability in producing any such evidence. - Decided against assessee Disallowance on account of repair and maintenance of machinery generator running and maintenance and miscellaneous expenses - HELD THAT - Assessee failed to rebut the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the self made vouchers made by the assessee which were not found to be verifiable. In absence of any scope of verification by the Assessing Officer of the relevant expenses claimed a lump sum disallowance made by the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as unreasonable. Accordingly we uphold the finding of the CIT(A) on the issue confirming addition - Decided against assessee.
|