M/s. Lucky Valley Investments & Holdings Limited, Bangalore V. ACIT, Ooty

ITA 1283/CHNY/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1252 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P B SEKHARAN
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH B BEFORE DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1283/MDS/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S LUCKY VALLEY INVESTMENTS & HOLDINGS LIMITED, NO. 26/1, SUA HOUSE KASTURBA CROSS ROAD BANGALORE 560 001. VS. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE I(1), OOTY PAN AAACL 8025 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI P.B. SEKHARAN ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEV ANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2006-07. THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I AT ITA NO. 1283/MDS/2009 :- 2 -: COIMBATORE DATED 08.06.2009 AND ARISES OUT OF THE A SSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APP EAL IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELING EXPENSES. TH E DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELING EXPENSES IS MODIFIED TO ` 60,000/-. 3. SECOND GROUND IS AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 4. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE EARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ENHANCED THE DISALLOWAN CE BY APPLYING RULE 8D OF THE I.T. RULES, 1961, WHICH IS NOT APPLICABLE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. WE FIND THAT DE HORS OF APPLICATION OF RULE 8D, DE FACTO SPEAKING, THE NOMI NAL ENHANCEMENT BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPE ALS) IS JUSTIFIED. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ENHA NCEMENT HAS BEEN MADE WITHOUT NOTICE IS NOT CORRECT. THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS MADE ENHANCEMENT ONLY AFTE R PROPER NOTICE. CONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS OF THE CASE, W E MODIFY THE DISALLOWANCE DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX (APPEALS) TO ` 1.5 LAKHS. ITA NO. 1283/MDS/2009 :- 3 -: 5. WITH THIS MODIFICATION, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE IS DISPOSED OF TREATING IT AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TUESDAY, 11 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2011, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI : 11 TH JANUARY, 2011 VL. COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR