DCIT, CHENNAI V. A.S.Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1033/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4692 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T N BETGIR I IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENTAND SHRI V, DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 1032 & 1033(MDS)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2009-10 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S A.S. SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD., 113, ARMENIAN STREET, CHENNAI - 600 001. PAN : AAACG 2906 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.N. BETG IRI, IRS, JCIT RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S. SRIDHAR, A DVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2013 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2008-09 & 2009-10. THESE APPE ALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III AT CHENNAI, PASSED ON 28.1.2013 AND A RISE OUT OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2 I.T.A. NOS. 1032 & 1033/MDS/13 2. THE COMMON ISSUE RAISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS IS T HAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN A LLOWING THE INCOME FROM WAREHOUSING TO BE A PART OF CFS INCOME AND GRANTING RELIEF UNDER SECTION 80-IA. IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT CFS OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT FIT IN EITHER PORT OR INLAND PORT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT AND HENCE, THE COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE DISAL LOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. 3. WE HEARD SHRI T.N. BETGIRI, THE LEARNED JOINT CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE AND SHRI S . SRIDHAR, THE LEARNED COUNSEL, APPEARING FOR THE RESPONDENT-ASSES SEE. 4. IN FACT, WHETHER THE CONTAINER FREIGHT STATION ( CFS) SET UP BY THE ASSESSEE CAN BE HELD AS PORT OR INLAND PORT WAS CONSIDERED BY ITAT, CHENNAI BENCH, IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2005-06 (15 TAXMANN.COM 247) (CHENNAI). THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT CFS RUN BY T HE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA. IN FACT, THE REVENUE HAD RELIED ON A JUDGMENT OF ITAT, CHENNAI B ENCH IN THE CASE OF CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. V. INCO ME TAX OFFICER BUT, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS O BSERVED THAT 3 I.T.A. NOS. 1032 & 1033/MDS/13 THE SAID DECISION OF ITAT HAS BEEN QUASHED BY THE H ONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN 21 TAXMANN.COM 317 (DELHI). 5. THEREFORE, IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ONLY BIND ING DECISION AVAILABLE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) IS THE DECISION RENDERED BY ITAT, CHENNAI BENCH IN ASSESSE E'S OWN CASE FOR EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2005-06. T HEREFORE, IT IS LEGITIMATELY INCUMBENT UPON THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) TO FOLLOW THE SAID ORDER TO DECIDE THE MA TTER IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS, THEREFORE, JUSTIFIED IN LAW. 6. IN RESULT, THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENU E ARE DISMISSED. ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME O F HEARING ON THURSDAY, THE 21 ST OF NOVEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (DR. O. K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2013. KRI. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/ CIT, CHENNAI-I, CHE NNAI/ CIT(A)-III, CHENNAI/DR/GF