TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT(A) is grossly erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 660000/- on account of Bank Guarantee written off. 3. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is grossly erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 103664/- on account of Depreciation. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing with the permission of the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench." 2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice sent by speed post duly served and the acknowledgement is returned therefore, it is presumed that the notice duly served to the assessee. It is seen from the records that the assessee has not appeared despite being given vari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the assessee's appeal are general in nature hence, need no separate adjudication. 7. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is against the sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 6,60,000/- on account of Bank Guarantee written off. 8. Ld. Sr. DR supported the order of authorities below and submitted that the assessee could not prove its claim with the supporting evidences. 9. I have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. I find that Ld.CIT(A) has given finding on fact by observing as under:- 4.0 "Ground no. 3 of the appeal is directed against the disallowance of expenses claimed for DBD Bank Guarantee written off amounting to Rs. 6,60,000/-. The appellant has cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was actually a part of the income in the earlier years. Thus, as the onus was on the appellant to prove the genuineness of the claim, the ground of appeal is dismissed as nothing was placed on record to prove that the amount regarding Bank Guarantee written off was actually part of the income in the current or earlier year(s)." 10. The finding on fact by the Ld.CIT(A) is not rebutted by the assessee by placing any contrary material on record. Therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of Ld.CIT(A) and the same is hereby, affirmed. Ground No.2 of assessee's appeal is dismissed. 11. Ground No.3 is against the sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 1,03,664/- on account of depreciation. 12. Ld.Sr.DR supported the order of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment order which are reproduced below:- "7.1 This submission of the assessee was considered but the same is not acceptable because of the following factual position:- a) In the computation of income filed with the return of income alongwith letter dated 30.09.2013, the income has been shown at Rs. 30,25,517/-, in which depreciation as per Income Tax Rules has been claimed at Rs. 9,10,491/-. b) The said depreciation chart of Rs. 9, 10,491/- is filed by the assessee with the Tax Audit Report which is also duly signed by the Tax auditors. c) The other alleged depreciation chart is not a part of Tax Audit Report, nor the same is signed by the Tax Auditors. Even in this depreciation chart the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 2....