DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), CHENNAI V. Indian Corporate Business Centre Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1265/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6906 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M SUBASREE
• Assessee Lawyers: V RA VICHANDRAN
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !', $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1265/CHNY/2018 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S INDIAN CORPORATE BUSINESS CENTRE LTD., NO.126/21, VAIKADU VILLAGE, MANALI, CHENNAI - 600 103. PAN : AAACI 2755 B (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : MS. M. SUBASREE, JCIT ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V. RAVICHANDRAN, FCA 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 14.02.2019 23( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.03.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -6, CHENNAI, D ATED 30.01.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISA LLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 I.T.A. NO.1265/CHNY/18 3. MS. M. SUBASREE, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT THERE WA S NO EXEMPTED INCOME, THEREFORE, THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE . ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT(APPEALS) PLACED HIS RELIANCE ON T HE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. V. ADDL. CIT ( 2017) 77 TAXMANN.COM 257. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE REVENUE HAS AL READY FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT. THEREFO RE, THE CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH CO URT. 4. WE HEARD SHRI V. RAVICHANDRAN, THE LD. REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. ADMITTEDLY, THERE WAS NO EXEMPTED I NCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. (SUPRA) FOUND THAT THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EARNED ANY EXEMPTED INCOME. THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE REVENUE APPEARS TO BE THA T THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT WAS CHALLENGED BY THE REVENUE BEF ORE THE SUPREME COURT. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT WAS STAYED BY SUPREME COURT. A MERE PEN DENCY OF APPEAL BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF MA DRAS HIGH COURT CANNOT BE A REASON TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW. THERE FORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RI GHTLY DELETED THE 3 I.T.A. NO.1265/CHNY/18 ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY PLACING R ELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DEDUC TION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE ACT IN RESP ECT OF CONTAINER FREIGHT STATION. 6. MS. M. SUBASREE, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THI S ISSUE WAS EXAMINED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CAS E FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIB UNAL BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CIT V. AL L OGISTICS (P) LTD. (2015) 55 TAXMANN.COM 283, FOUND THAT THE CONTAINER FREIGHT STATION IS ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE ACT. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER PLACED HER RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF APEX COURT IN CIT V. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (2018) 404 ITR 397 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE APEX COURT FOUND THAT THE CONTAINER FREIGH T STATION IS ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE A CT. 7. WE HEARD SHRI V. RAVICHANDRAN, THE LD. REPRESENT ATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO. ADMITTEDLY, THE CONTAINER FREIGHT S TATION IS PART OF THE INLAND PORT. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSES SEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 FOUND THAT THE CONTAINER FR EIGHT STATION IS ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE A CT. NOW, RECENTLY THE 4 I.T.A. NO.1265/CHNY/18 APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (SUPRA) FOUND THAT THE CONTAINER FREIGHT STATION IS ELIGIBL E FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, TH IS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1 ST MARCH, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !') ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 1 ST MARCH, 2019. KRI. . ,167 87(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+/ APPELLANT 2. ,-*+/ RESPONDENT 3. 0 91 () /CIT(A)-6, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-2, CHENNAI 5. 7: ,1 /DR 6. ' ; /GF.