Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7036 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Cross Objection
Pronouncement Date
22-03-2012
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Bench Allotted
C
Assessment Year
2007-2008
Appeal Filed On
20-10-2010
Judgement Text
, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- C , KOLKATA [ . .. . , ,, , . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , , , , '# ] [BEFORE SHRI N.VIJAYAKUMARAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI C.D.RAO , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] $ $ $ $ / ITA NO. 1808/(KOL) OF 2010 %& '(/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE- X,KOLKATA M/S.STRASSENBURG PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., KOLKATA . (PAN-AAECS 2834 H ) (+, / APPELLANT ) - - VERSUS - (/0+,/ RESPONDENT ) 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 /C.O.NO.163/KOL/2010 $ $ $ $ /A/O ITA NO. 1808/(KOL) OF 2010 %& '(/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S.STRASSENBURG PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., KOLKATA . (PAN-AAECS 2834 H ) - - VERSUS - D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-X,KOLKATA ( +, +, +, +, /APPELLANT ) ( /0+, /0+, /0+, /0+, / RESPONDENT ) +, 3 4 '/ FOR THE DEPARTMENT: / SHRI RANADHIR GUPTA /0+, 3 4 '/ FOR THE ASSESSEE: / SHRI ARVIND AGARWAL 5 3 !# /DATE OF HEARING : 19.03.2012. 6' 3 !# /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.03.2012. '7 / ORDER ' ' ' ' . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , , , , '# PER C.D.RAO, AM THE ABOVE CROSS APPEALS ONE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE OTHER FILED BY ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST ORDERS OF THE LD. C.I.T.(A)-CE NTRAL-II, KOLKATA, DATED 30.07.2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS A PPEAL IS RELATING TO SUBSIDY ON RECEIPT OF RS.43,82,708/- BY THE ASSESSEE AS WEST B ENGAL INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION ASSISTANCE AS CAPITAL RECEIPT. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US THE LD. COU NSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ON SIMILAR ISSUE IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE THE HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT UNDER GA NO.2042 OF 2011 ITAT ORDER NO.201 OF 2011 DATED 21 ST JULY 211 HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. AGAIN ON SIMILAR ISSUE THIS TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO ALLOWED THE APPEALS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NOS.1131,1132 & 1133/KOL/2009 .216/KOL/2010 ORDER DATED 27 TH JANUARY, 2011. SINCE THE FACTS IN THIS CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE DECISION OF THE H ONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURTS DECISION AND THIS TRIBUNAL FOR A.YR. 2007-08 HE REQUESTED TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR APPEARING ON B EHALF OF THE REVENUE THOUGH RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO COULD NOT CONTRADICT THE SA ID REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. 5. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS COVERED BY EARLIER ORDERS OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN I TA NOS.1131-1133/KOL/2009 DATED 27.01.2011 AND ALSO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT (SUPRA). THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF ORDER OF THIS TRI BUNAL IN PARA 6 ARE AS UNDER :- 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL PLACED BEFORE US AND THE DECISION OF THE ITAT AND ALSO THE DECISION OF THE H ONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT CITED SUPRA. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY T HE AFORESAID DECISIONS CITED SUPRA AND THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISIONS TRE ATED THE WBIPA RECEIPT AS A CAPITAL RECEIPT AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITIONS FOR ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL. SINCE THE LD. CIT(A BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS ORDER AND ALSO THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL 1TAT, TREATED THE WBIPA RECEIPT AS A CAPITAL RECEIP T AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITIONS FOR ALL THE THREE A SSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN HIS ORDER AND THE SAME IS HERE BY UPHELD. 5.1. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE DISMISS GRO UND NO.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT GROUND NO.1 OF THE REVENUES APPEA L IS DISMISSED. 3 6. THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE AND IN CROSS OBJECTION RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE IT ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF IT RULES . 7. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ON CARE FUL PERUSAL OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACT THA T SINCE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS RELATING TO A.YR. 2007-08 AS PER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ AND BOYCE MFG. PVT . LTD. (SUPRA) RELIED UPON BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, RULE 8D IS NOT APPLIC ABLE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THIS TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN TAKING A CONS ISTENT VIEW OF SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A AT 1% OF THE DIVIDEND INCOME. ACCORDINGLY WE DIRECT THE AO TO DISALLOW 1% OF THE DIVIDEND INCOME AS EXPENDITURE R ELEVANT TO EARNING OF DIVIDEND INCOME. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 22.03.2012. SD/- SD/- . .. . , , , , % % % % N.VIJAYAKUMARAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# '# '# '# , C.D.RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( (( (!# !# !# !#) )) ) DATE: 22.03.2012. '7 3 /%% 8''9- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S.STRASSENBURG PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., P-6, CIT ROAD, KOLKATA-700014. 2. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-X, KOLKATA 3. CIT. 4. CIT(A)-CENTRAL-II, KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA 0 /%/ TRUE COPY, '7/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES R.G.(.P.S.) 4
