TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1102
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s..5,19,136/- on account of unconfirmed credit balance in sundry creditors. (ii) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs..8,29,704/- on account of unconfirmed unsecured loan. (iii) The learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing depreciation on truck of Rs..56,922/-. (iv) The learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing depreciation on Factory Shed amount of Rs. 68,184/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Partnership Firm engaged in the business of manufacturing of Engineering goods, filed return of income for relevant Assessment Year on 26.09.2009 declaring the total income at Rs..3,43,980/-. The assessment was completed on 29.12.2011 under section 143(3). The Assessing Officer while framing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... On the other hand, the learned DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone throughthe orders of the authorities below. The Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings observed that the assessee has shown the purchases from M/s Anil Agency. The said party has shown sales of Rs. 65,95,453/-. And there is a net difference of Rs. 8,05,398/- in the closing balance and in the list of sundry creditors. The assessee was asked to explain and reconcile the difference. The assessee filed reconciliation and contended that its sister concern M/s Shree Uma Electricals has made payment of Rs. 11,50,000/- on behalf of assessee to M/s Anil agency. The AO v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... loan. The ld AR for the assessee argued that the AO made the addition of Rs. 8,29,704/- on account of unsecured loan holding that the assessee holding that the assessee failed to reconciled the loan from its sister concern. It was argued that assessee has shown unsecured loan of Rs. 53,99,916/- in the name of Uma Electricals the assessee gave proper explanation explaining the reasons for differences in the closing balance in the books of assessee and its sister concern. The discripency occurred due to the reasons that no journal entry was made in the books of assessee. The transfer entry was made without affecting the revenue of either company. The AO as well as the ld CIT(A) doubted for the reasons that the entry was not reflected in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....books of account of M/s Uma Electricals was not filed during the assessment proceedings. Considering the fact that the assessee has properly reconciled the transfer entry and there is no revenue effect in either of the concern. Moreover, the AO has not brought on record any adverse material on record against the assessee this ground of appeal is allowed. 8. Ground No.3 relates to the disallowance of depreciation on Truck. The ld AR for the assessee argued that the vehicle was put to use as the vehicle can be used on temporary Registration number. It was further argued that the assessee made the entire payment of cost of purchase before 31.03.2009 and copy of the relevant evidence is filed on record. On the other hand the ld DR for the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ogress hence, no depreciation was claimed during earlier year. On the other hand the ld DR for the revenue supported the order of authorities below. 11. We have considered the rival submissions of the ld representatives of the parties and further gone through the order of the authorities below. The AO disallowed the depreciation of the factory shed holding that the assessee has not substantiated with documentary evidence that addition was made in the factory building of the assessee. The AO also hold that no proof of source fund, proof of payment was filed during assessment. During the first appellate stage the ld CIT(A) called remand report form AO. In the remand report the AO mentioned that on verification of record for FY 2007-08, it ....