9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals)-XVII {CWT (A)}, New Delhi for assessment year 2008-09. 2. Brief facts of the case are that based on the income tax assessment proceedings for assessment year 2006-07, the Assessing Officer reopened the wealth tax assessment for assessment year 2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .07.2012 that the assessee was not the owner of the Lamborghini car. The Ld. CWT (A) held that since as per the order of the ITAT, the ownership of the Lamborghini car was not with the assessee, therefore, the assessee was not entitled to any depreciation thereon. The Ld. CWT (A) proceeded to enhance the net wealth of the assessee by Rs. 5,96,815/- and dismissed the assessee's appeal. Now, the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xed for hearing on 13.01.2014 and thereafter the appeal has been adjourned five times at the request of the assessee and today is the sixth time that an adjournment has been sought by the assessee. In such circumstances, we do not find it appropriate to entertain the adjournment application moved on behalf of the assessee and we dismiss it and while dismissing the same, we proceed to hear the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of ITAT Delhi in assessee's own appeal in ITA No. 2485/Del/2010 dated 13.07.2012 in which it is said to have been held that the assessee is not owner of the Lamborghini Car. On the other hand, the Ld. CWT (Appeals) has also noted that the assessee's appeal before the ITAT was decided in assessee's favour. Thus, there appears to be a contradiction in the finding recorded by the Ld. CWT (A). T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
