ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI V. AFTAB P SHIVDASANI, MUMBAI

ITA 1200/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3347 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MORYA PRATAP
• Keywords: Depreciation; Tax effect

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. 1200/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 THE ACIT - 11(1), ROOM NO. 439, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.MARG, MUMBAI- 400020. VS. SHRI . AFTAB P. SHIVDASANI, 22, MISTRY COURT, 4 TH FLOOR, DINSHA WACHHA ROAD, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI- 400020. PAN- ALSPS4468D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. MORYA PRATAP RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING: 02/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02/06/2016 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAI NST ORDER DATED 09/11/2012 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 TH E DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION OF MOTO R CAR @ 50% CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2 ITA NO. 1200/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN NOT APPRECI ATING THAT ITEM III(2) OF DEPRECIATION TABLE PERTAINS TO MOTOR CARS OTHER THAT THOSE USED IN THE BUSINESS OF HIRE, WHICH IS APPLICABLE T O THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT ASSESSEE AND ITEM III(3) (VIA) OF THE DEPRE CIATION TABLE IS APPLICABLE TO NEW COMMERCIAL VEHICLES THAT ARE USE D FOR THE BUSINESS OF HIRE. 3. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(APPEALS) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. WE NOTICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW RS.10,00,000/- AND, AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015, DATED 10/12/2 015, 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 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 2 ND JUNE, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( R.C.SHARMA ) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 02/06/2016 3 ITA NO. 1200/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 / 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