Income-tax Officer, V. Tapi Irrigation Development Corporation, Jalgaon

ITA 1951/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 195124514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P S NAIK
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH SHAHEMPLOYEE
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1 951 /PN/20 1 3 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 ) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), JALGAON, OLD B.J. MAR KET, JALGAON, DISTT. - JALGAON . APPELLANT VS. TAPI IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SINCHAN BHAWAN, AKASHWANI CHOUK, JALGAON, DISTT. - JALGAON PAN : AA CCT7606E . RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : MR. P. S. NAIK ASSESSE E BY : MR. YOGESH SHAH(EMPLOYEE) DATE OF HEARING : 2 3 - 0 9 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 - 0 9 - 201 4 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM T H E CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) - II, NASHIK DATED 2 9 .0 8 .2013 WHICH, IN TURN, HA S ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 28 . 02 .201 3 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U /S 143(3) (II) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT ) PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11 . 2. I N THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. O N THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE CIT(A) ERRED IN RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF VIDARBHA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WHEREAS THE SAID DECISION HAS NO T REACHED TO ITS FINALITY. 2. O N THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE CIT(A) ERRED IN TREATING THE INCOME AS FROM BUSINESS OR PROFESSION WHICH IS NOT SO, THE CIT(A) HAS OVERLOOKED THE AUDIT REPORT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ITSELF SPEAKS ABOU T DIFFERENT ASPECT. ITA NO.1 951 /PN/2013 A.Y. : 20 10 - 11 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - II, NASHIK BE VACATED ON THIS POINT AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. THE RESPONDENT - ASSESSEE IS A GOVT . CORPORATION FORMED UNDER THE TIDC ACT, 1998 WITH THE MAIN OBJECT OF CONSTRUCTIONS OF DAMS, CANALS AND IRRIGATION SCHEMES EN - ROUTE RIVER TAPI AND SUPPLY OF WATER TO FARMERS, HOUSEHOLDS, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USERS IN MAHARASHTRA. 4. IN THE PRESENT AP PEAL , THE ONLY ISSUE IS AS TO WHETHER THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.3,48,25,000/ - EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON SHORT TERM DEPOSIT WAS TO BE TAXED UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION OR UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER IN AN ASSESSMENT FINALIZED U/S. 143(3)(II) OF THE ACT DATED 28.02.2013 TREATED THE SAID INCOME AS TAXABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE CIT(A) HAS DISAGREED WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AS PER THE CIT(A) THE INTEREST INCOME WAS LIABLE TO BE TAXED UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS FROM BUSINESS OR PROFESSION AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 28 (I) OF THE ACT. AGAINST SUCH A DECISION OF THE CIT(A) , REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT EMERGED THAT THE C IT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF HIS PREDECESSOR IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 (SET - ASIDE APPEAL), 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10 DATED 28.09.2012. THE LD. DR, QUITE FAIRLY POINTED OUT THAT THE AFORESAID THREE ORDERS O F THE CIT(A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10 DATED 28.09.2012 HAVE SINCE BEEN APPROVED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 29.11.2013 BY WAY OF ITA NOS. 2367 TO 2369/PN/2012. A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD AND, AS PER TH E LD. DR SUCH ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CONTINUES TO HOLD THE FIELD AS IT HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED BY ANY HIGHER AUTHORITY. ITA NO.1 951 /PN/2013 A.Y. : 20 10 - 11 3 6. FOLLOWING THE ABOVE PRECEDENT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE AND THE ISSUE RAISED BEEN SIMILAR, WE AFFIRM THE CONCLUSION OF THE CIT(A). ACCOR DINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 7. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) ( G. S. PANNU ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED : 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 . RK COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE ; 2) THE DEPARTMENT ; 3) THE CIT(A) - II, NASHIK ; 4) THE CIT - II, NASHIK ; 5) THE DR B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE ; 6) GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE