TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 810X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een from the orders of ITAT pertaining to earlier years, there are various issues which were sent back to the AO for examination and re-determination. Consequent to those orders, if there are any brought forward losses and (or) un-absorbed depreciation, assessee is entitled to claim set-off and carry forward of the same as the case may be in this year. AO is directed to re-determine the amount and allow the necessary benefit as per the provisions of law. This ground is considered allowed for statistical purposes. Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) - Non remitting of TDS - Held that:- Since the TDS was remitted during the impugned assessment year, assessee is entitled to claim the deduction of the same amount. - I.T.A. No. 1955/HYD/2014 - - - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 1,17,59,357/-; iv. Brought forward losses - NIL 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before CIT(A), the AR filed additional evidence under Rule 46A. The additional evidence submitted was sent to the AO by CIT(A) and the AO was directed to examine the evidence, cause further enquiries as deemed fit and submit his report after giving due opportunity to assessee. 4.1. The AO has sent his remand repot on 23-01-2014 wherein it was stated that though the notices were issued to the assessee calling for details, there was no responses from assessee . After the report, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition by stating as under: 5. It is pertinent to mentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd on facts in upholding the assessment made u/s 144 of the IT Act by the Ld.AO. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that, for the AY 2010- 11 when there is no rejection of books of account, the disallowance of depreciation of ₹ 1,54,86,314/- cannot be made. 3. The AO ought to have appreciated the fact that, once the amount of addition towards Block of Assets is entered into the same should be continued from each year unless it is discarded or removed and depreciation should be allowed on that. 4. In this regard we have placed reliance in the case of M/s. Coromandal industries Ltd having ITA No's 287,288,289 and 1512/H/08. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO, while disallowin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0(a)(ia) of the Act for the AY. 2010-11 as the TDS of ₹ 2,89,05,040/- relating to AY.2009-10 was paid in AY 2010-11. 12. The assessee may add, alter or modify or substitute any other point to the Grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal . 6. Ld. Counsel while referring to the orders of the earlier years and prayer for additional evidence submitted that assessee could not present properly before the authorities due to arrest of MD and subsequent Civil/Criminal proceedings and financial difficulties. Assessee is now in a position to substantiate and mainly requested for restoring the issues to the file of the AO for fresh examination. 6.1. Ld. DR however, has no objection for verificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, we remit the issues to the file of the AO to examine the evidence being submitted by assessee and thereafter consider the claim of depreciation made by assessee. These grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 7.2. Ground Nos. 5 to 9 is with respect to adhoc disallowance of consumption of raw material and personnel cost. This issue has also been adjudicated in assessee s own case for the AY. 2009-10 in ITA Nos. 353/Hyd/2013 665/Hyd/2013. The relevant para of the Co-ordinate Bench decision is as under: 16. With respect to consumption of raw material, the CIT(A) has given a finding that increase in material consumption has effected a corresponding increase in circulati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is considered allowed for statistical purposes. 7.4. Ground No. 11 is an additional ground claiming allowance of the amount of ₹ 2,89,05,040/- which was disallowed in AY. 2009-10 as the TDS was not remitted in that year. Since the TDS was remitted during the impugned assessment year, assessee is entitled to claim the deduction of the same amount. The amount was confirmed in assessee s own case for AY. 2009-10 in ITA Nos. 353/Hyd/2013 665/Hyd/2013. The relevant para of the said order is as under: 11. The next ground is on the issue of disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. As it has been admitted by the assessee itself that the TDS has been remitted into Government account on 5.10.2009, we direct the CIT(A) to allow the TD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
