Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2009 (12) TMI 980

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....option but to proceed ex-parte qua the assessee and dispose of this appeal on the basis of material available in the file.   2. The first ground raised is that the learned first appellate authority erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,26,936/- made on account of disallowance of depreciation on the fixed assets. On questioning from the Bench about the tax effect, it was fairly pointed out that the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit. I have considered the submissions put-forth by the learned Senior DR and perused the material available on record. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 8,53,871/- on the fixed assets. The learned Assessing Officer based upon the comments of the auditors in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....06/- made by the AO by applying the provisions of sec. 154(3) on account of incorrectness and incompleteness of books of account.". 2. During hearing of the appeal, we have heard Smt. Aparna Karan, ld. Sr. DR and Shri H.P. Verma along with Shri Ashish Goyal, Ld. Counsel for assessee. At the outset, it was pointed out that there is typographical error in mentioning the figure of Rs. 6,37,206/- in the ground of appeal as the correct figure is Rs. 3,94,732/-. The assertion of the assessee was consented to be correct by the ld. Sr. DR. Further, it was pointed out that the tax effect is also below monetary limit, therefore, the appeal of the revenue may be dismissed. The ld. Sr. DR fairly agreed to the submission of the assessee to the extent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s.) 1. ITAT 2,00,000/- 2. Appeal under section 260A before High Court 4,00,000/- 3. Supreme Court 10,00,000/- The Board further clarified the tax effect, which means the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable, had such total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of the issue against which appeal is intended to be filed. However, the tax will not include any interest thereon. In cases of penalty orders, the tax effect will mean quantum of penalty deleted or reduced in the order to be appealed against. In the present appeal, the total disputed addition is Rs. 3,94,732/-, therefore, as agreed/canvassed by ld. representatives from both si....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s not furnished by the assessee consequently these are not allowable whereas before the learned first appellate authority there is a factual finding that in all previous years' returns were duly filed by the assessee and the same were available on record of the Assessing Officer. In the impugned order the learned first appellate authority has directed the Assessing Officer to allow carry forward of brought forward losses of earlier years which were not set off after verification of records of earlier years. Even otherwise, it is a case of assessed loss which has not been set off. Consequently, we are in agreement that in view of the provisions of section 72 it should be allowed. Consequently, there is no grievance to the revenue since it....