Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Arjun Pulp And Paper India Pvt Ltd., ... vs Acit (Osd) Corporate Range 1, Chennai on 12 April, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'सी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'C' BENCH, CHENNAI
ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, या यक सद य एवं
ी एस. जयरामन, लेखा सद य केसम$
BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
रोक या चका सं/ S.P. No.127/Chny/2019
(in I.T.A. No.860/Chny/2019)
नधा&रण वष& / Assessment Year : 2014-15
M/s Arjun Pulp and Paper India Pvt.
Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner of
nd
2 floor, No.149, v. Income Tax (OSD),
Robert V Chandran Tower, Velachery, Corporate Range 1,
Tambaram High Road, Pallikaranai, Chennai - 600 034.
Chennai - 600 100.
PAN : AACCV 5130 F
()ाथ&क/Petitioner) ()+यथ,/Respondent)
)ाथ&क क. ओरसे /Petitioner by : Ms. P.M. Anuradha, Advocate
)+यथ, क. ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar,
Addl.CIT
सन
ु वाई क. तार ख/Date of Hearing : 12.04.2019
घोषणा क. तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 12.04.2019
आदे श /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The assessee has filed the present Stay Petition praying for stay of recovery of outstanding amount for the assessment year 2014-15.
2 S.P. No.127/Chny/19
2. Ms. P.M. Anuradha, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the only issue arises for consideration is depreciation. According to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of depreciation on the ground that the unit was not set up. According to the Ld. counsel, the unit was set up and commercial production was also started. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer. On a query from the Bench whether any material evidence is available to indicate for setting up of unit and commencing the commercial production, the Ld.counsel very fairly submitted that she does not have any material immediately, however, it can be produced before this Tribunal.
3. We heard Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. Even though the assessee claims that the unit was set up and commercial production was commenced, no material evidence was produced before this Tribunal or before the lower authorities. For the purpose of claiming depreciation, it is necessary for the assessee to establish that the unit was set up and commercial production was commenced. In the absence of any material to indicate that the unit was set up and commercial production was started, this Tribunal finds no prima 3 S.P. No.127/Chny/19 facie case for grant of stay. However, the appeal has to be heard at an early date. Accordingly, while dismissing the petition, the Registry is directed to post the appeal for final disposal on 29.04.2019. Since the date of hearing was announced in the presence of both the parties, it may not be necessary for the Registry to issue a separate notice of hearing. In other words, a copy of this order shall be treated as notice of hearing for 29.04.2019.
4. With the above observation, the Stay Petition filed by the assessee stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 12th April, 2019 at Chennai.
sd/- sd/-
(एस. जयरामन) (एन.आर.एस. गणेशन)
(S. Jayaraman) (N.R.S. Ganesan)
लेखा सद य/Accountant Member या यक सद य/Judicial Member
चे नई/Chennai,
th
4दनांक/Dated, the 12 April, 2019.
Kri.
आदे श क. ) त5ल6प अ7े6षत/Copy to:
1. )ाथ&क/Petitioner 2. )+यथ,/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु8त (अपील)/CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयु8त/CIT 5. 6वभागीय ) त न ध/DR 6. गाड& फाईल/GF. 4 S.P. No.127/Chny/19