ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1089/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52008 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 08-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JR
• Assessee Lawyers: SAROJ KUMAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Earning of tax free income
• Section: 143(3); 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1089/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-I(3), CHENNAI. VS. M/S.CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO.LTD., DARE HOUSE, NO.2, NSC BOSE ROAD, CHENNAI-600 001. PAN:AAACC1226H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K. E.B.RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAROJ KUMAR, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 8 TH NOVEMBER, 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 9 TH NOVEMBER, 2011 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2004-05. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS )-III AT CHENNAI DATED 17.03.2011 AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSE SSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961. ITA NO.1089/M DS/2011 2 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DIREC TING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION ON LEASED A SSETS. THIS ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ITAT FOR T HE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03 AND 2003-04 IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR. THEREFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY DECIDED THE MATTER FOLLOWI NG THE BINDING ORDERS ALREADY PASSED BY THE JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUNAL. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE TO KEEP T HE MATTER ALIVE AS THE EARLIER ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE AL READY BEEN TAKEN UP BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. 3. AS THE ISSUE STANDS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE ORDERS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH PASSED FOR THE EARLIER ASS ESSMENT YEARS AND UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX(APPEALS) ON THIS POINT. 4. THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DI RECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RESTRICT THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER ITA NO.1089/M DS/2011 3 SECTION 14A TO 2% OF EXEMPT INCOME AS AGAINST 10% O F EXEMPT INCOME DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. FOR THE REASONS WELL DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN PARAGRAPH 5.2 OF HIS ORDER, WE FIND THAT THE QUANTUM OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AT 2% OF EXEMPT INCOME IS QUITE REASONABLE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 9 TH NOVEMBER, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) ( DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 9 TH NOVEMBER, 2011. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT ( 4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.