TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 875
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ature of assessee's business was to carry out mining, transporting, loading job of coal for Eastern Coal Field Limited, Bharat Coking Coal Limited. It filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 34,91,938/-. The Assessing Officer determined the total income at Rs. 87,03,385/- after making the following additions:- (1) Addition on account of disallowance of depreciation - Rs. 35,13,409/-; (2) Addition on account of unverified credit balance of Ravi Bhattar- Rs. 6,50,000/-; (3) Disallowed on account of payment of EPF -Rs.1,30,526/-; (4) Disallowance on account of unverifiable Dumper and vehicl e hire charges - Rs. 4,17,512/-; (5) Disallowance on account of assessee's claim for various expenses - Rs. 5,00,000/- Bein....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to justify its claim on account of rate of depreciation at 30%. He allowed the depreciation at the rate of 15% only by observing that the assessee had not put any substant ive argument to justify the rate of depreciation. He further observed that the assessee was not giving Dumpers on hire to other operators for the purpose of t ransporting and allied activities. The assessee was itself involved in these activities for various organizations like ECL at Nabokajors, Madhabpur, BCCL and was raising the gross bill on those entities. Primarily he disallowed the assessee's claim on the ground that the assessee was not giving the dumpers on hi re but using for it s own business for earning the hiring income/rental income. 5. Ld. CIT(Appeal s) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pril, 1990. The Assessing Officer concluded that when the dumpers are given on hire, the assessee would be entitled for depreciation at the rate of 30%. However, that is not the correct interpretation of the law, because if the assessee is transporting the goods of other persons, then al so the dumper is given on hire and under such circumstances, in view of the dec ision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Anup Chand & Co. reported in 239 ITR 466 the assessee was entitled for higher rate of depreciation as the vehicles are to be considered as being given on hire for transportation of goods of other persons. The assessee was not transporting its own goods but the goods of other persons and deriving hire charges. By co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regard. Merely because reply to a query under section 133(6) had not been received, it cannot be presumed that a t rade creditor has not creditworthiness. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Pancham Das Jain reported in 205 CTR 444, wherein, on similar fact s, that addition was deleted. 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have perused the records of the case. Out of the total sundry c reditors aggregating to Rs. 2,19,93,756/-, the Assessing Officer has made the addition of Rs. 6,50,000/- as the assessee neither produced the creditors nor gave any detail s in regard to suppliers. Merely submi tting the bills in support of purchases cannot be the basis for deleting the additi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re charges payable at Rs. 89,93,832/-. He noted that the assessee had debited the dumper and pay loader hi re charges of Rs. 4,77,58,229/- in the assessment year 2008-09. From the detail s furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noted as under:- "(i ) It contains 502 names of the persons, (ii) All the payments payable were shown to be less than Rs. 20,000/-. (iii) The sum of the payments comes to be Rs. 89,93,832/-. (iv) the assessee had not provided the details of registered nos. of vehicl es along with details of registration papers of vehicle to prove the ownership/contention that the dumper and pay loader hire charges were payable to these persons appearing in the list. From these details, he concluded that the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... out even on a single i tem, which was not verifiable. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). Hence, Ground No. 4 of Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 14. We observe that the Ground No. 5 contains a typographical error in regard to the amount therein because the ground raised relates to disallowance of Rs. 5,00,000/- which was deleted by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and not Rs. 4,17,512/-. We, therefore, modify this ground as under:- (5) That the ld. CIT(A), Asansol has erred in law and on facts by allowing the relief of Rs. 5,00,000/-, disallowed by the AO on account of excessive expenses claimed. 15. Brief fact s apropos Ground no. 5 are that the Assessing officer made a disallowance of Rs. 5,....