2016 (12) TMI 238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 28/10/2004, declaring total Loss at Rs. 9,56,10,090/-.The Assessing Officer(AO)completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act,on 13.12.2006, determining its income at (-) Rs. 5,26,61,000/-. ITA/2237/Mum/2011 2.First ground of appeal is about disallowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 45.76 lakhs,being depreciation on the capitalise WDV of Rs. 1.83 Crores on account of unpaid customs duty.During the assessment proceedings,the AO found that the assessee had capitalised an amount of Rs. 2.09 Crores, being custom duty payable on plant and machinery and had claimed depreciation on it. Following the order for the AY.2003-04,he disallowed the claim of depreciation holding that depreciation was not allowable for the year under consideration a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2,29,475/- to the total income of the assessee (interest at the rate of 8%). 7.During the appellate proceedings before the FAA,the assessee made submissions. After considering the same and following the order of his predecessor for the earlier AY.,he held that none of the reasons given by the assessee for not charging interest on advances had been established, that assessee had not furnished any evidence,that the reasons of the assessee were unsatisfactory, that the assessee had not established that the amount were given out of its noninterest- bearing funds, that it had made a simple statement that it had been done in commercial expediency or for business purposes,that such an explanation could not be accepted,that the assessee had not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roceedings,that the project was scrapped and the assessee made necessary entries about payment made to JA as provision expenditure. The AO held that procedure adopted by the assessee in claiming the expenditure was not as per the provisions of the Act, that the expenditure should not have been debited to the AY. Under reference,that it did not pertain to the year under consideration, that proper and transparent method of claiming the expenditure should have adopted,that as per the schedule O to the balance sheet the amount in question was appearing as current assets under the name loans and advances, that the schedule indicated that assessee's claim survive and rightly so as arbitration proceedings were ending, that the claim of the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... upheld the order of the AO. 12.We find that the assessee had paid and amount of the 50 lakhs to JA, that it had detected tax at source as per the provisions of the act, it had claimed that project was abandoned, that JA did not return the money, that arbitration proceedings were going on at the time of assessment proceedings, that it had shown the amount in question in the balance sheet under the head loans and advances. In our opinion, the FAA was justified in holding that claim made by the assessee was premature and did not pertain to the AY.under appeal. As the order of the FAA does not suffer from any legal infirmity,so,confirming the same we decide the third ground against the assessee. ITA/2746/Mum/2011: 13.The first ground of ap....