BOND CONSULTANTAS P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 9(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1453/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0253 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T A KHAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 14A; 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'F' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P K BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1453 /MUM/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) M/S. BOND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 9(1)(2) B - 1, STC SOCIETY V.S. PHADKE ROAD, ANDHERI (E) MUMBAI 400069 AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. MARG MUMBAI 400020 PAN AABCB4609G APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: MS. NEELAM JADHAV RESPONDENT BY: SHRI T.A. KHAN DATE OF HEARING: 05.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.08.2017 O R D E R PER D.T. GARASIA, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-16, MUMBAI DATED 19.01.2016 FOR A.Y. 2005-06 . 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST T HE DISALLOWANCE OF ` 2,24,820/- UNDER SECTION 14A R.W. RULE 8D OF THE IN COME TAX RULES, 1962. 3. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO HAS DET ERMINED THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A R.W. RULE 8D AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER DATED NO. CIT(A)-16/724/06-07 DATED 10.02.2010. AFTER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION OF RECTIFICATION BEFORE THE AO TO RECTIFY THE ORDER TH AT THE ASSESSEE NOW IS NOT BOX CRAFT CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. BUT IT IS BOND CONS ULTANTS PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MOVED AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE A O THAT AS PER THE ASSESSEES WORKING THE DISALLOWANCE WORKED OUT TO O NLY ` 21,264/-. THE AO DID NOT CONSIDER THE SAME. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2016 M/S. BOND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD 2 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING WE HAVE VERIFIED THE RECORDS AND WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY RECTIFICAT ION APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 10.02.2010 FOR MODIFICATI ON OF THE ORDER. WE FIND THAT THE AO HAS WRONGLY CALCULATED THE DISALLOWANCE . THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE FILED THE RECTIFICATION APPLIC ATION UNDER SECTION 154 BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO HAS PASSED THE ORIGINAL ORDER AND NO APPEAL CANE FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BECAUSE THE A O HAS PASSED THE ORDER S PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CIT(A). THE LEARNED A.R. HAS FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO FILE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE CIT(A). THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REASONABLE CAUSE TO FILE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO HAS PASSED THE ORIGINAL ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS THE LIBERTY TO FILE RECTIFI CATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH AUGUST, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - (P.K. BANSAL) (D.T. GARASIA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 9 TH AUGUST, 2017 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -16, MUMBAI 4. THE PR. CIT - 9, MUMBAI 5. THE DR, F BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.