Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 684 - ITAT SURATDisallowance of depreciation on vehicle - DR for the revenue submits that for claiming depreciation on asset particularly vehicle, the ownership is sine qua non. Assessee is not the owner of such vehicle - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) in A.Y. 2013-14, allowed relief to the assessee without verification of fact whether similar depreciation is claimed by son of assessee or not. No finding about the prime condition about the ownership was considered and discussed, therefore, totally differ from the finding of ld. CIT(A) in A.Y. 2013-14 and concur with the finding of ld. CIT(A) for the year under consideration. The case laws relied by the ld. AR of the assessee are not at all applicable on the facts of the present case. Thus ground of appeal related to disallowance of depreciation of vehicle is dismissed. Addition on account of 5% of labour expenses - addition for want of proper evidence - HELD THAT:- Once the addition was made for want of evidence, cannot be allowed without holding that there is sufficient evidence to substantiate such claim. Now adverting to the facts for the year under consideration, as noted above that the ld. CIT(A) partly concur with the findings of the AO that no supporting evidence was given. Before Tribunal, the assessee has neither given any evidence nor furnished the details of number of labourers, casual labours or their salary or attendance register to substantiate such claim. In absence of any evidence or explanation, find that the AO was quite justified in making addition/disallowance to the extent of 5% of the labour expenses. Therefore, uphold the orders of lower authorities qua this issue. In the result this ground of appeal is also dismissed.
|