2010 (10) TMI 1094

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has erred in not upholding the assessee's challenge to the validity and legality of the assessment. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) should have upheld the assessee's contention that the assessment order was bad in law and deserved to be quashed. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of depreciation and further erred in confirming the quantum of such disallowance in a sum of Rs. 3.90 crores (Rs.3,90,30,081/0 to be precise). (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of interest expenditure and further erred in upholding the quantum of such disallowance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case in disallowing Rs. 14,59,500/- paid to M/s Shah Mehta Majumdar, C.As for management consultancy fees. (3) The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in allowing depreciation on disallowance of Rs. 1,71,000/- paid to Octroi Department on additional demand raised. (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the AO. 2. The facts of the case are that assessee was incorporated in the year 1993 and is engaged in the business of development of software for corporate and individual clients. It also carries the export of customized software as per the requirements of the clients. The assessee company disclosed a turnover of Rs. 23,33,41,693/- which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... documents and papers impounded during the course of survey operation were not supplied to the assessee. The AO asked the assessee to attend the office on 24.3.2003 to inspect the impounded papers and cross-examine Rahul Parikh and Smt. Vandana Parikh whose statements were recorded. The allegation of the department is that assessee carried out exports of the computers purchased from Shri Rahul Parikh and Smt. Vandana Parikh two ex employee of the assessee company. These persons have denied to have made any sale to the assessee company. Thus not only the purchases were bogus but also apparently sales carried out of such computers were also bogus. In this connection assessee required to inspect the impounded documents and to cross-examine Rah....