TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is further observed by him that all these documents were available with the AO also. By no stretch of imagination it could be said that the CIT(A) while allowing the additional evidence, made a wrong statement that all these documents were available with the AO also. Nowhere in the order it is stated that the assessee came forward with any additional evidence at the appellate stage. Assessee simply produced the copies of the documents which are already available with the AO, on considering which, while observing that basing on these documents which were available with the AO, CIT(A) reached their conclusion that Unit-II commenced its operations since 24/08/2009. - Decided against revenue - I.T.A. No.4515/Del/2014, Cross Objection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 009, as such, in the absence of evidence to hold that the company has started production in Unit II before September 2009, held that 50% of the depreciation claimed in respect of Unit II by the assessee company, was liable to be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee company. 3. When the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against all the additions, insofar as this particular addition based on disallowance of 50% depreciation on assets in respect of Unit-II, CIT(A) verified the documents produced before him with the record and held that the documents which were available before the AO show that production in the Unit-II had started since August, 2009 onwards. In particular CIT(A) referred to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccasion for the assessee to do so since the documents are available on record and video also. 6. We have carefully gone through the impugned order. No doubt ld. CIT(A) stated in his order that on a careful consideration of the evidence furnished before him in the shape of copies of the sales invoices for the period between 20/04/2009 2 30/09/2009 along with the copies of the transporter s receipts, nevertheless it is further observed by him that all these documents were available with the AO also. By no stretch of imagination it could be said that the CIT(A) while allowing the additional evidence, made a wrong statement that all these documents were available with the ld.AO also. Nowhere in the order it is stated that the assessee came f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
