TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 339
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eciation on fixed assets which are allegedly not utilized for business purpose. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,18,710/- is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in making a disallowance of Rs. 11,62,513/- out of repair & maintenance expenditure allegedly on account of personal expenditure. 4. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making a disallowance of Rs. 78,834/- being 1/4th of total disallowance made by Ld. A.O. of Rs. 3,15,339/- out of sales promotion expenditure alleging the same to be expenditure of personal nature. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining disallowance of Rs. 75,000/- being 1/4th of total disallowance made by Ld. A.O. of of Rs. 3,00,000/- being expenditure towards vendors meet alleging the same to be a private party. 6. That....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6 and 459 are all in relation to the building / furniture and fixture etc carried out by the assessee company in its plant at Plot No. 74-75 and administrative block at the same plant. The assessee enclosed the voucher along with photocopy of material receipt cum inspection report which contained the signature of all the factory officials. It was pointed out that those assets were duly put to use in the factory premises of the assessee company for the purpose of its business. The Learned AO deputed two inspectors of income tax on 2-12-2011 to conduct a limited survey at the factory cum office premises of the assessee at Plot No. 74-75, Sector 6, Faridabad to verify the addition to fixed assets claimed by the assessee. The report of the inspectors along with the photographs indicate that - a) the factory has not seen any addition to fixed assets of any sort during the year in question b) the depreciation chart submitted along with audited financial statements as well as the supporting bills submitted indicate numerous additions under the head Building and Furniture and Fixtures - which on site visit were revealed to be inaccurate and nonexistent as no addition was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Rajesh Talwar stating that the time given to him was very short and that he was preoccupied with some other work and accordingly sought time for a fresh date. Thereafter, a fresh Summons was issued to him on 8-12- 2011, seeking personal attendance on 14-12-2011. On 14-12-2011, the assessee submitted a letter which was received in the office on 15-12-2011 at 5 pm, stating that the evidences collected by the department were not supplied to the assessee and hence the director would not be ablt to confront the same. The Learned AO accordingly concluded that Shri Rajesh Talwar was only exhibiting his non-cooperative attitude towards the department . Further, a letter dated 23-12-2011 was filed by the assessee stating that Shri Rajesh Talwar was out of station and preoccupied with earlier business assignments. The Learned AO concluded that the Director of the assessee company was consciously avoiding personal attendance and was exhibiting non-cooperative attitude throughout by not furnishing the requisite details. However, the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 19-12-2011 was given copy of the evidences including bills / cash memo / retail invoice and the statements of the vendors ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llowance made on account of sales promotion expenditure at the rate of 25 percent of the disallowance made by the Learned AO and confirmed 25 percent of the vendor meeting expenses of disallowance made by the Learned AO. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us and revenue is not in appeal before us. 7. We find that the Learned CIT(A) had vehemently relied on the examination carried out by the Learned AO during the course of assessment proceedings by deputing the inspectors for field visit twice to the factory premises and wherein the inspectors had given a factual report that the concerned assets were not at all installed in the factory cum office premises of the assessee company and the entire factory was in a dilapidated condition indicating no fresh installation of assets being made there on during the year under consideration. Accordingly, the Learned CIT(A) reiterated the findings of the Learned AO and had confirmed the disallowance made on account of depreciation. Before us, the Learned AO was not able to point out any contrary material to this effect. Hence, we do not deem it fit to interfere in the order of the Learned CIT(A) disallowing the depr....