ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. True Value Homes (India) Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1843/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0853 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 20-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: G GOPALAN
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1843(MDS)/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE III(2), CHENNAI. VS. M/S. TRUE VALUE HOMES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,TVH TRIVENI, 21-CV RAMAN RD., ALWARPET CHENNAI-600 018. PAN AAACT7955Q. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI GURU B HASHYAM, IRS, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.GOPALAN DATE OF HEARING : 20 TH FEBRUARY, 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 TH MARCH, 2013 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPE ALS)-III AT - - ITA NO.1843 OF 2012 2 CHENNAI, DATED 9-7-2012 AND ARISES OUT OF THE ASSES SMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRE SENT APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEA LS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF ` 4,83,59,772/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 36(1)(II) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961. 3. THE VERY SAME ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THEIR ORDER OF EVEN DATE PASSED IN ITA NO.1093(MDS)/2011 FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2008-09. AFTER EXAMINING THE ISSUE IN DETAIL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS AGREED WITH THE FINDING OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX(APPEALS) THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER WAS NOT LAWFUL. IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAID O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, WE HOLD FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR AS WELL THAT THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS TO BE DECIDED AGAINST IT. 4. IN RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. - - ITA NO.1843 OF 2012 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 18 TH OF MARCH, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 18 TH MARCH, 2013. V.A.P. COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.