TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment u/s. 143(3) was completed and the reopening was within four years, we also do not find any merit in the additional grounds raised. In view of this, ground is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. Coming to the main Grounds of Appeal, assessee has raised as many as 13 grounds on five issues of additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the assessment order. Ground No. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9 are material grounds which are as under: "2. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(3), Hyderabad has erred while disallowing an amount of Rs. 1,84,81,375/- towards advances - others written off and the same has been confirmed by the Commissioner of Income tax-V, which is not correct, not justified and bad in law. 3. The Dy. Commissioner of Inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issues which do not require any adjudication. 4. Briefly stated, assessee is in the business of internet service provider and in the impugned assessment year filed return of income admitting a total loss of Rs. 3,96,52,413/-. AO noticed that assessee-company has debited an amount of Rs. 1,84,81,375/- towards advances written off including capital goods and therefore, reopened the assessment u/s. 147. Even though, AO notes that AR attended and after discussion, assessment is completed, he however, disallowed various amounts on the reason that assessee has not explained properly/for want of proof. The various issues considered by the AO as confirmed by CIT(A) are dealt with ground-wise: 5. Ground No.9: Before adverting to other grounds, we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....existence is not there. The appellant has not shown any proof to substantiate its claim of purchase of fixed assets as per Schedule 2 Balance Sheet. No details have been provided regarding the fixed assets. During physical inspection, the inspector could not even find the fixed assets. 9.3 In view of the above facts, I find that when the existence of the asset themselves is not proven, there is no question of allowing depreciation on the same". 7. Ld. Counsel at the outset drew our attention to the computation of income filed along with return of income to submit that assessee's P&L A/c indicate a loss of an amount of Rs. 9,76,12,872/-. From there, assessee has added back i.e., reduced the depreciation claim of Rs. 5,79,60,459/- and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e business at that point of time during the period of completion of assessment and now they have restarted the business, they were in a position to furnish the necessary details. In view of that, we are of the opinion that one more opportunity can be given to assessee to substantiate the claims made in the return of income / P&L A/c. Assessee is directed to furnish necessary details to AO and AO to examine whether the amounts can be allowed as write off as per the provisions of the Act. With this, Ground No.2 is considered allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Ground No. 3 is with reference to treating an amount of Rs. 19,11,589/- unsecured loans as income u/s. 68. In the absence of any confirmation for increase in the unsecured loans duri....