9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19.04.2013 for assessment year 2011-12. Shri B.C. Jain, Ld. Authorized Representative appeared on behalf of assessee and Md. Ghayas Uddin, Ld. Departmental Representative represented on behalf of Revenue. 2. Both the appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by way of consolidate order. First we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No.2320/Kol/2013. 3. The facts in brief are that assessee, a Private Limited Company, engaged in transportation business has filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.9,79,92,809/-. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny CASS module and accordingly issued notice u/s. 143(2) / 142(1) of the Act upon the assessee. The assessment was framed u/s. 143(3) at a total income of Rs.12, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the order of AO by observing as under:- "4. In ground no 2, it has been contended that the AO was not justified in not allowing sum of Rs. 1,25,30,287/- as expenditure on current repairs which was inadvertently reflected as investment in tenanted property in the statement of accounts. It was explained before the AO that the said sum was claimed as depreciation but the same should be allowed as expenditure. The issue is covered by my order dated the 18th July, 2012 in the case of the appellant for the assessment year 2010-11 in Appeal No. 241/CIT(A) C-I/CC-IV/Kol/11- 12. It was held in para 13 of the said appellate order that similar sum was neither allowable as ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no dispute about the genuineness of the expenditure but in the instant case the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the expenditure. Therefore, the order of the Hon'ble ITAT is distinguishable as the facts of both the cases are different. The question to treat the 'current repair' as capital expenditure arises only when the assessee establishes the genuineness of the expenses. As in the case before us the assessee failed to furnish the necessary details in support of its claim before the lower authorities, therefore the plea for depreciation cannot be entertained. However, now the ld AR has submitted the list of expenses of the 'current repair' expenses along with the bank statement for consideration. In the aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e neither excessive nor unreasonable. The disallowances are confirmed." Being aggrieved by this order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee came in second appeal before us. 11. Before us Ld. AR submitted that all the necessary details were not furnished before Authorities Below due to massive fire broke out in the office of assessee. Ld. AR also submitted that in the earlier years, no disallowance in the above expenses was made by the Authorities Below. In support of assessee's claim Ld. AR submitted a chart of the expenses which reproduced below as under:- A.Y Turnover Telephone exp. Disallowance telephone Business promotion Disallowance business promotion Misc. Exp. Disallowance misc. exp. 09-10 35162.00 236.27 Nil 2.66 Nil 252.77 Nil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in comparison to earlier years vis-à-vis to the turnover of assessee. It is also important to note that there was a massive fire broke out in assessee's office premises as claimed by assessee and that may be one of the reasons for non-production of the supporting evidence before the authorities below. However none of the Authorities Below have not commented to this aspect. Since there is no finding of the Authorities Below on this aspect whether the assessee failed to give satisfactory reply due to fire break out in the office of assessee and if that is not the case then it was the duty of assessee to justify all the expenses claimed in its profit and loss account. However, we are not interested in sending back the matter to the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted the expenditure on repair & maintenance was representing the current repairs and it was duly accounted for in the books of account and tax audit report. The AO has found no defect in the books of account while framing assessment proceedings and Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee has deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under:- "... ... I have perused the assessment order and copy of the tax audit report produced in course of the appellant proceedings. I find that sum of Rs. 125.30 lakhs is reflected in schedule "D" Fixed Assets to the tax audit report under the head "Development of Tenanted Property". This fact has also be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
