Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (11) TMI 611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... matter to the District Valuation Officer, the AO added the same to the total income of the assessee, which was, in turn, confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. There is catena of judgments that in the present facts and circumstances of the case it is the duty cast upon the AO to refer the matter for determining the fair market value. In the absence of such statutory compliance made by the Ld. AO, we do not find the addition is justified and the same is, thus, deleted. Disallowance of ROC tax - HELD THAT:- The said addition has been made pursuant to the ratio laid down in the matter of Punjab Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.[ 1996 (12) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] and also the judgment passed in the matter of Brookebond India Ltd. [ 1997 (2) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] which has not been controverted by the assessee in the written notes of submission in the absence of which, we confirm the said addition. Addition on account of membership fees - HELD THAT:- It is the case of the assessee that such membership paid every periodical years has been allowed as business expenses. In that view of the matter, we do not find any justification in making such addition for the yea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as fulfilled all the ingredients of section 68 of the Income Tax Act. It has proved identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. Under the circumstances, the addition made is illegal and therefore requires to be deleted. It is submitted that it be so deleted now. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,58,300/- as undisclosed short term capital gain and that too without granting opportunity of being heard. It is therefore submitted that the addition made is illegal and therefore requires to be deleted. It is submitted that it be so deleted now. 3. The learned CIT(A)-8 Ahmedabad has deleted the Grounds no. 4. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the ROC tax of Rs. 10,235/- without granting an opportunity of being heard. It is submitted that it is business revenue expenditure allowable U/s 37 of the Income Tax act. It is submitted that it be so allowed now. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the membership fees of Rs. 1,50,000/- paid to All India Gems Jewellery Federation without considering the facts on record. It is submitted that the said expenditure is allowable as per the jurisdictional High .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ldi, Ahmedabad. 1000721 Shri Vardhman Ornaments Pvt.Ltd. 03/02/2012 25,000/-Dr Sarvodaya Comm .co. op. Bank -Paldi, Ahmedabad 1000988 Shri Atul K Shah It further appears that the accounts of the appellant company were audited under the provision of Section 44AB of the Act wherein no such defect in fact the above fund were source from OD account of the assessee company which is running by Mr. Atul K. Shah and his proprietary concern. The bank statement further shows various payments and receipts. Moreso, the appellant company audited under S. 44AB of the Act in which no defect has been pointed out, since, once the appellant has proved the money has come from a particular source, the impugned addition cannot be made under Section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credit, hence, the same is deleted. 8. The addition of Rs. 1,58,300/- on account of undisclosed short term capital gain (STCG) has been challenged before us. The short fact leading to the issue is that the assessee sold out an immovable property being a shop .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee has vide letter dated: 28/01/2015 submitted a copy of the bill evidencing purchase of such vehicle. A perusal shows that such vehicle stands in the name of Sh. Hemantkumar Amrutlal Patel with bill dated : 24/03/2012 and amounting Rs. 12,99,243/-. The Insurance papers also bear the name of this person. Accordingly, it was again issued a show cause notice dated: 13/02/2015 which reads as under: --------- A perusal of the bill to evidence the purchase of vehicle - XUV shows that the same stands in the name of Sh Hemant Kumar Amrutlal Patel. As such, the vehicle stands neither in name of director nor in name of the company. By this you are again provided an opportunity to prove that such vehicle was indeed purchased by the company and furnish copy of bank statement/cash book duly highlighting such transaction of investment. In absence, please show cause as to why the investment so made may not be considered to be unexplained and thus may not be added back to your total income under applicable provisions of the Act. Further, please show cause as to why the depreciation claimed on such vehicle may not be disallowed----. 10.2 In response, the assessee has vide letter da .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... irectors but were financed and recorded as assets by the company. Hon'ble Tribunal has reached the finding that depreciation shall not be allowed unless it is established that it is beyond the control' of the tax payer to register the asset in its name. Thus, merely financing the asset shall not suffice to claim the ownership. 10.5 In view of the facts available on record and the discussion made herein above, it is inferred that the XUV was registered in the name of the director of the company and since the company was not the owner it did not have any right to claim depreciation on the same. Even otherwise, it is very important to consider that even the director of the company became the legal owner of the vehicle in question in the following FY i.e. on 17.04.2012. Accordingly, the depreciation claimed on such vehicle at Rs. 1,23,522/- is hereby, disallowed and added back to the total income. 13. The Ld. CIT(A) while confirming the same observed as follows: 10.1 In the course of appellate proceedings, appellant contended that the car was used for the purpose of the appellant's business and furnished copy of the invoice which shows the car to be on the n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates