TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Accordingly, we direct the AO to recomputed the depreciation as per the aforesaid directions given by us specifically mentioning the serial numbers. Accordingly, the Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is partly allowed. Disallowance of bad debts - disallowance was sustained by the ld CITA was with regard to the fact that the assessee had not proved the debt as irrecoverable in respect of these 54 parties - HELD THAT:- We find that pursuant to amendment made in section 36(1)(vii) of the Act with effect from 1.4.1989, it is enough if the debt had been written off as irrecoverable by the assessee to claim the same as bad debt u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act. There is no need to prove that the said debt had become irrecoverable after 1.4.1989. Reliance in this regard is placed on case of TRF Ltd [ 2010 (2) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT] . Accordingly, we direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance of bad debts Claim of deduction u/s 35AD - AO in the remand report had stated that assessee had not claimed any deduction u/s 35AD of the Act in the return of income and that the assessee had made this claim for the first time only during the course of assessment proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 20,99,904/-. The assessee also submitted that the data from ITD database may be incorrect or the parties may have erroneously put wrong PAN and accordingly adding the difference in the hands of the assessee would not be justified. The ld AO however held that the assessee failed to offer any explanation for the difference sum of ₹ 20,99,904/- with supporting evidence and brought to tax as unexplained credit in the assessment. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules which were forwarded to the ld AO for remand report. The assessee was further able to reconcile the differences to the tune of ₹ 9,08,963/-. The ld AO furnished a remand report accepting to the relief of ₹ 9,08,963/- and prayed for sustaining the addition of ₹ 11,90,941/- before the ld CITA. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 2.2. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the issue under dispute was the subject matter of adjudication by this tribunal in Asst Year 2010-11 in assessee s own case in ITA No. 5101/Mum/2015 dated 17.4.2018 wherein it was held as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n no addition can be made when there is no other materials before the Assessing Officer to demonstrate that assessee has received income more than what is declared by him. In the present case also, a perusal of the assessment order reveals that apart from the AIR information, there is no other material / evidence available before the Assessing Officer to establish that assessee has received more income than what is shown in the Profit Loss account. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the direction of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) which is upheld. Ground no.1, is dismissed. 9. In view of what is discussed above, we do not find any valid reason for the Assessing Officer to make addition towards unreconciled income as the addition was solely based on AIR information and without making proper enquiries, without submitting the information as requested by the assessee. In the circumstances, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 2.3. We find that during the year under appeal, the assessee was able to reconcile 97.48% of the total transact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6,75,819 3.2. The ld AO in the remand report observed that perusal of the above items indicate that CCTV, DPU1001A- Wifi, Minitower Dell, Network Switch, Others, Printers, Racks and Router are in no way related to the computer or its peripherals as they do not in any way enhance the working of the computer or the computer is not dependent for its functioning. These are add-ons and are not integral part of the computer system to qualify it to avail depreciation @ 60%. Accordingly, he prayed for sustaining the disallowance of ₹ 6,75,819/- before the ld CITA. The ld CITA accordingly sustained the disallowance of ₹ 6,75,819/-. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3.3. We have heard the rival submissions. From the table above, we find that the items in Serial Numbers. 1,2,3,4,6 8 are certainly integral part of computer thereby eligible for depreciation at 60%. The other two items in Serial Numbers 5 7 would be eligible for depreciation at 15%. Our finding is in consonance with the decision of Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs Datacraft India Ltd reported in 40 SOT 295 dated 9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bt had been written off as irrecoverable by the assessee to claim the same as bad debt u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act. There is no need to prove that the said debt had become irrecoverable after 1.4.1989. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd reported in 323 ITR 397 (SC). Accordingly, we direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance of bad debts in the sum of ₹ 13,91,338/-. Hence the Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. 5. The last issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in not entertaining the assessee s claim of deduction u/s 35AD of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5.1. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the ld AO in the remand report had stated that assessee had not claimed any deduction u/s 35AD of the Act in the return of income and that the assessee had made this claim for the first time only during the course of assessment proceedings and filed revised computation. The ld AO also observed that the assessee in support of this claim had also submitted the Chartered Accountant s certificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
