Lapse of 15 years to produce Supporting Documents before AO: ITAT disallows Depreciation Claim [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench disallowed depreciation claim as there was Lapse of 15 years to produce supporting documents before Assessing Officer (AO).

The assessee, M/s. Owens Corning India Pvt. Ltd filed its original return of income declaring total income of Rupees 90,26,17,260/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation in respect of addition to fixed assets as the assessee failed to produce any supporting documents for verification in the earlier Assessment Orders passed for the A.Y.2006-07 and 2011-12. Assessing Officer observed that the appeal filed by the assessee against order of the A.Y. 2006-07 is confirmed by the CIT(A) and assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.

The CIT(A) observed in his order that this issue is relating to original disallowance pertaining to A.Y. 2006-07. In that assessment year Assessing Officer disallowed depreciation as the assessee failed to produce the invoices with respect to additions made to the fixed assets. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Appellate Authorities and the issue travelled upto the ITAT and ITAT remitted back the issue to the file of AO. The set aside the claim of assessee.

The CIT(A) observed that “Even after a lapse of almost 15 years, the assessee failed to produce the required invoices before the Assessing Officer and even at the fag end of time barring period asked for further time. Further, he observed that assessee had sufficient opportunity to comply with the requirement and it failed to avail the opportunity and also Assessing Officer granted relief to the assessee to the extent of invoices submitted by the assessee i.e. to the extent of Rupees 2.92 crores and directed the Assessing Officer to allow consequential effect in A.Y. 2014-15 to that extent and he partly allowed the ground raised by the assessee. “Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Bench consisting of Amit Shukla, Judicial Member and Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member held that “The assessee prays that the depreciation may be allowed without there being any evidences on record does not justify. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence or justification we are inclined to accept the findings of the CIT(A).”

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates