ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI V. AKSHAY KHANNA, MUMBAI

ITA 1149/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3307 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MORYA PRATAP
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJIV M SHAH
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Tax effect
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI ( JM) ITA NO. 1149/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 THE A CIT, 11 ( 1 ) , ROOM NO. 439, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.MARG, MUMBAI- 400020. VS. SH RI. AKSHAY KHANNA., 12/A, L. SUMANGAL, 13, B.G.KHERMARG, MAHABAR HILL, MUMBAI- 400006. PAN- AAGPK4677B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. MORYA PRATAP RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. SANJIV M.SHAH DATE OF HEARING: 01/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/06/2016 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAI NST ORDER DATED 12/11/2012 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-3, MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER O N FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING DE PRECIATION OF RS. 4,05,000/- DISALLOWED BY THE A.O. AND IGNORED THE F ACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY EVIDENCES TO PROVE THE SPEED BOAT WAS 2 ITA NO. 1149/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 PUT TO USE AND WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR BUSI NESS PURPOSE DURING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 4,05,000/- RELYING ON FRESH EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFO RE HIM IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING TH E ADDITION MADE U/S 14A RULE 8D AMOUNTING TO RS. 5,41,324/-. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN IGNORING TH E PROVISIONS OF SECTION U/S 14A(3) WHEREIN IT IS PROVIDED THAT SECT ION U/S 14A CAN BE INVOKED EVEN IN CASES WHERE AN ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED IN RELATION TO EXEMPT INCOME. 5. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(AP PEALS) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW 10,00,000/- AS THE DEPRECIATI ON MADE U/S 14A RULE 8D OF THE ACT. HENCE, AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015, DATED 10/12/2015, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. THE LD. DR FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT I N DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS BELOW 10 LAKHS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN AP PEAL DOES NOT FALL UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS SPECIFIED IN PARA 8 OF THE CIRCU LAR. SINCE, IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR AFORESAID TH AT THE INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY 3 ITA NO. 1149/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS; THE PRE SENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. WE, THEREFORE, DISMIS S THE SAME IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST JUNE, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( R.C.SHARMA ) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 01/06/2016 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. / CIT 5. !' , $ !'% , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. &' ( / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, ) //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI PRAMILA