DCIT, CHENNAI V. PSA Sical Terminals Ltd., Tuticorin

ITA 1030/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95832 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P S SEKARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . , , ! '# $ , % & BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1030/MDS./2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007-08) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI. VS. M/S.PSA SICAL TERMINALS LTD., TTN CONTAINER TERMINAL/BUIDING, BERTH NO.7,HARBOUR ESTATE, TUTICORIN 628 004. PAN AABCP 2897 G ( '( / APPELLANT ) ( $)'( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.P.S.SEKARAN, CIT D.R / RESPONDENT BY : MR.S.SRIDHAR,ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 21.07.2015 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.08.2015 * / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-3(I/C), CHENNAI DAT ED 20.02.2015 ITA NO.1030 /MDS/15 2 IN ITA NO.845/13-14 PASSED UNDER SEC.143(3) READ W ITH SECTIONS 147 & SEC. 250 OF THE ACT. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THREE GROUNDS IN ITS APP EAL, HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A), WHO HAD ERRED IN ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/ S 80-IA OF THE ACT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2006-07 & 2009-10 DATED 06.12.2012, THOUGH THE SLP FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL MADRAS HIGH COURT IS PENDING. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY, ENGAGED IN THE BUSI NESS OF SHIPPING, FILED ITS REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2007-08 ON 31.10.2007 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME AS ` 60,28,408/- UNDER NORMAL COMPUTATION. THE CASE WAS TAKEN FOR SCRUTINY AND AS SESSMENT U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147 WAS COMPLETED ON 25.03.2013 WH EREIN THE LD. A.O DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80-IA(4) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.1030 /MDS/15 3 3.1. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION U/S.80-IA OF THE ACT RELYING ON THE DECIS ION OF THE CHENNAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2009-1 0 IN ITA NOS.1604 TO 1607/MDS./2012 VIDE ORDER DATED 6 TH DECEMBER, 2012. HOWEVER THE LD. A.O OPINED THAT SINCE THE REVENUE I S IN APPEAL AND THE MATTER IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE MADRAS HIG H COURT, HE IS JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U /S.80-IA OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y 2007-08. 4. ON APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, LD.CIT (A) DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF CHENNAI BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASES FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2009-10 (SUPRA). 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. D.R ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. LD. D.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ARRIVED AT THIS DECISION OUT OF ABUNDAN T CAUTION, BECAUSE THE REVENUE HAS CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE HONB LE JURISDICTIONAL ITA NO.1030 /MDS/15 4 HIGH COURT AND THE MATTER IS PENDING. THE LD. A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN THE ASS ESSEES OWN CASE CITED SUPRA AND PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT (A) MAY BE UPHELD. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PE RUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE FACTS OF TH E CASE IT APPEARS THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE REVENUE WAS ON APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUPRA) BEFORE THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COU RT, HE NEED NOT FOLLOW THAT DECISION. HE DID NOT REALIZE THAT MERE FILING OF THE SLP BEFORE THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IS NOT A VALID GROUND FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. FU RTHER, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE TRIBUN AL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SURPA) IS STAYED BY THE HONBL E JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY STAY GRANTED BY THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT AGAINST TH E OPERATION OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS TRIBUNAL, ALL THE LOWER JUDICI ARIES AS WELL AS QUASI JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES ARE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE DECISI ON OF THE ITA NO.1030 /MDS/15 5 JURISDICTIONAL APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. SINCE THE LD.CI T(A) HAS RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSE SSEES OWN CASE CITED SUPRA AND HELD THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE AS SESSEE, WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF T HE LD.CIT(A). THEREFORE WE HEREBY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. LD . CIT (A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSE D ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 12 TH AUGUST,2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 12 TH AUGUST,2015. K S SUNDARAM. '# $%&% /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. '() /CIT(A) 4. ' /CIT 5. %*+ , /DR 6. +-. /GF