ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI V. RAVI H. HEMDEV, MUMBAI

ITA 1098/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71500 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K SINGH
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'D' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1098 & 1096/MUM/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2003-04 AND 2004-05) ASSTT. CIT-11(1) ROOM NO.439, AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. MARG MUMBAI-20. VS. MR. RAVI H. HEMDEV 35 SHIVDHAM SOUTH AVENUE ROAD SANTACRUZ (W) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) P.A. NUMBER : AAJPH 3396 H ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DEEPAK TRALSHAWALA REVENUE BY : SHRI S.K. SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 09/10/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09/10/2013 O R D E R PER I.P. BANSAL, JM: BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE. THEY A RE DIRECTED AGAINST CONSOLIDATED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 10.11.2010 INTERALIA INCLUDING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 20 04-05. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER :- ITA NO.1098/MUM/2011 (2003-04): 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN DELETING EX CESS AMORTIZATION COST OF RS.4,23,000/- DEBITED TO PROFI T AND LOSS ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS IN CONTRAVENTION T O THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T. ACT AND I.T. RULES. ITA NO.1096/MUM/2011 (2004-05): ITA NO.1098 & 1096/M/11 A.Y.03-04 & 04-05 2 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN DELETING EX CESS AMORTIZATION COST OF RS.7,65,000/- DEBITED TO PROFI T AND LOSS ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS IN CONTRAVENTION T O THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T. ACT AND I.T. RULES. 2. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THE DELETION OF ADDITION CONTESTED BY THE REVENUE ARE SUMS OF RS.4, 23,000/- AND RS.7,65,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND 2004- 05 RESPECTIVELY. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTA TIVE THAT TAX EFFECT IN BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IS A SUM OF R S.1,33,245/- AND RS.2,40,975/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004 -05 RESPECTIVELY. REFERENCE WAS MADE OF INSTRUCTION NO.3/11 DATED 09/ 02/2011. THEREFORE, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE CONTEN DED THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS SHOULD BE DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT AS THE SAME HAVE BEEN FILED IN CONTRAVENTION OF AFOREM ENTIONED INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE CBDT. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR CO ULD NOT CONTROVERT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN EACH OF THE BOTH OF APPEALS IS LESS THAN A SUM OF RS.3.00 LACS. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION AS TAX EFFECT IN EACH OF THE BOTH OF APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS.3.00 LACS, WE DISMISS TH ESE APPEALS ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. 3. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 TH OCTOBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (I.P. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 09/10/2013. JV. ITA NO.1098 & 1096/M/11 A.Y.03-04 & 04-05 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.