TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddin was unable to point out any mistake on the part of the learned Tribunal in allowing the claim for depreciation. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that this appeal is wholly un-meritorious and the same is dismissed. The question formulated is based on incorrect assumption of facts. - ITA No. 131 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 20-7-2016 - Girish Chandra Gupta And Arindam Sinha, JJ. For the Appellant : Md.Nizamuddin, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.R.N.Bajoria, Mr.Akhilesh Gupta, Malay Dhar, Mr.A.K.Dey, Advocates ORDER The Court : The subject matter of challenge is a judgment and order dated 24th October, 2008 by which the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 1071/Kol/2007 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s follows:- We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the order of the C.I.T. (Appeals) and various documents filed in the compilation by the A.R. The material facts in this case are not in dispute and it is not disputed that the respondent company has capitalized the entire amount in the books of account for the purchase of the capital goods worth ₹ 92,82,90,609/-. It is also not disputed that the respondent company has not claimed any depreciation or any other deduction till the date of search except depreciation of ₹ 58,05,918/- for Asst. Year 2000-01 on ₹ 3,14,47,344/- capitalized in the books of accounts of company. Since the respondent-company has not claimed depreciation on capital goods worth & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de and depreciation to the extent of ₹ 58,05,918/- was allowed to the company for the Asst. Year 2000-01. Since no incriminating material was found in the course of search, indicating fictitious purchase of capital goods worth ₹ 3,14,47,344/-, no addition can be made in Block Assessment. However, the Assessing Officer may consider the same while completing assessment/reassessment of that particular year. From the aforesaid findings of the learned Tribunal recorded in its order dated 27th October, 2005, it appears that during the assessment year 2000-01, assets for ₹ 3,14,47,344/- were claimed to have been purchased for which depreciation was also claimed. From the order under challenge, the following findings reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar assessment of assessment year 2000-01 was completed u/s. 143(3) in which the purchases of assets were not held to be bogus and depreciation on such assets is allowed. In view of the above facts, there was no justification for disallowance of depreciation amounting to ₹ 82,85,357/- in the year under consideration. We, therefore, uphold the order of the C.I.T.(A) and dismiss the appeal filed by the department. Mr.Nizamuddin, learned advocate appearing for the revenue appellant did not dispute the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal that the regular assessment of the assessment year 2000-01 was completed under section 143(3), in which the aforesaid purchases of ₹ 3,14,47,344/- were not held to be bogus and depreciati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
