GAGRATS, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT RG 11(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1885/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 88560 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAVAN KUMAR BEER LA
• Assessee Lawyers: DHARMENDRA SINGH
• Keywords: Revenue expenditure

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI , ,, , !' !' !' !' '''# '''# '''# '''#$ $$ $ % % % % BEFORE SHRI B R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. : 1885/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) M/S GAGRATS, NIRMAL, 12 TH FLOOR, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI -400 021 MUMBAI -400 0 .: PAN: AAGFG 0728 H VS ACIT- CIRCLE 11(2), MUMBAI -400 020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PAVAN KUMAR BEERLA /DATE OF HEARING : 09-02-2015 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04-03-2015 & & & & ORDER '''# '''# '''# '''# , , , , : :: : PER VIVEK VARMA, JM: THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 3, MUMBAI, DATED 26.02.2012, WHEREIN, THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAVE BEEN RAISED: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE FIRM TO THE SPOUSE OF THE DECEASED PARTNER AS PER THE PARTNERSH IP DEED AND THUS DISALLOWING THE SUM OF RS.12,00,000. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE SPOUSE OF THE DECEASED PARTNER MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE C OURSE OF HEARING. 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE PERTAINS TO DISALLOWANCE OF PAYMENT MADE BY THE FIRM TO THE SPOUSE OF THE DECEASED PARTNER. M/S. GAGRATS ITA 1885/M/2012 2 3. THE FACT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM PAID RS. 10,11,868/- TO MRS. MANECK J. GAGRAT, SPOUSE OF THE DECEASED PARTNER A ND CLAIMED THE SAME AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE U/S 37. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT WAS PAID AS PER CLAUSE 12.4 OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED AND JUSTIFIED THE CLAIM OF RELYING ON THE DECISION OF CIT VS MULLA & MULLA & CRAIGIE, B LUNT AND CAROE, REPORTED IN 190 ITR 884 (BOM). 4. AT THE TIME OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, THE AR FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ISSUE WAS A SUBJECT MATTER OF APPE AL IN THE PRECEDING YEAR AS WELL AND THE ITAT HAD SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE AS MADE BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN ITA NO . 6068/MUM/2010, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 6. AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASO N TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION TAKEN BY CIT(A), WHICH ACCORD ING TO US IS EXHAUSTIVE AND SPEAKING AND GIVING COGENT REASONS. IN ANY CASE, THE ITAT HAS ALREADY TAKEN A DECISION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRECEDING YEAR, WHICH WE FOLLOW. 7. WE, THEREFORE, SUSTAIN THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) AND AS A CONSEQUENCE REJECT THE GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/03/2015. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( '''# '''# '''# '''# ) % % % % & & & & % % % % (B R BASKARAN) ( VIVEK VARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 04/03/2015 M/S. GAGRATS ITA 1885/M/2012 3 '/ COPY TO:- 1) / THE APPELLANT. 2) / THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT(A) -3, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT-11, MUMBAI/CIT -11, MUMBAI. 5) / THE D.R. G BENCH, MUMBAI. 6) ()* + COPY TO GUARD FILE. ,%- / BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / . / / 0 , '1! , 2 3 DY. / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI *CHAVAN, SR.PS