9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al is as under: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A ought to have granted deduction of Rs. 4,98,402/- towards electric power as the same is incurred in the course of business." 3. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that an amount of Rs. 4,98,402/- towards electric power was capitalized by the department and depreciation has been allowed therein by the CIT(A). The learned DR has relied on the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). We have considered rival submissions and perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). The assessee has already been allowed depreciation on the amount of electric power capitalized and no case for allowing the same as revenue expenditure could be made before us, and according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered rival submissions. We find that no evidence in support of the claim of the assessee could be filed by the assessee before us also, and accordingly, the ground no.3 of the assessee is dismissed. 8. The ground no.4 of the assessee is as under: "4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 51,216/- out of garden expenses when all the details, bills and vouchers were produced during assessment stage." 9. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that expenses of Rs. 51,216/- is incurred for maintenance of garden and complete details thereof were filed. The learned DR relied on the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). We have considered rival submissions. We find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case the ld.CIT(A) ought to have granted deduction u/s.10 in respect of SEZ Unit." 13. We have heard parties. This ground is merely academic in nature, and accordingly is not adjudicated upon. ITA No.2948/Ahd/2008 (Revenue's Quantum Appeal) 14. The only ground of the appeal of the Revenue is as under: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, theld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO of Rs. 26lacs on estimation of profit." 15. The learned DR submitted that the assessee could not justify the loss shown in its trading account by the assessee, and therefore, the addition of Rs. 26 lakhs was made on estimation of profit was justified. The learned counsel for the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing no mistake in the order of the CIT(A), the same is confirmed, and the ground of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA No.2521/Ahd/2010 (Revenue's appeal) - Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 17. The only ground of the appeal of the Revenue is as under: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty imposed by the AO in respect of additions of Rs. 4,98,402/-, Rs. 3,31,474/-, Rs. 3,68,207/- and Rs. 2,92,8125/- made on account of disallowance of capital expenditure, foreign travelling expenses, interest u/s.36(i)(iii) and professional fees, respectively." 18. The learned DR relied on the order of the AO. She referred to the relevant portions of the penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
