GROWMOARE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

ITA 2133/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7722 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 24-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUM BAI , , , , ! BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM / I.T.A. NO.2132/MUM/2015 & 2133/MUM/2015 ( '# $# / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1994-95 & 1997-98) GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 32, MADHULI, DR. A.B.ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI 400 018 / VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 31 (NOW DCIT, CC 4(3) ) 4 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AAACG4397D ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING: 24.03.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29.03.2017 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2015 FOR THE A.Y.1994-95 AND 02.01.2015 FOR THE A.Y.1997-98 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 52, MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)]. ITA NO.2132/MUM/2015:- ASSESSEE BY: SHRI ASHWIN KASHINATH & SHRI DHARMESH SHAH REVENUE BY: DR. P. DANIEL ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT AS PER THE DECISION OF HONBLE SPE CIAL COURT DATED 30.04.2010 IN MP NO.41 OF 1999, THE ASSETS UN DER CONSIDERATION AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL INCOME BELONGS TO LATE SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND HENCE THE INCOME CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TAXED IN THE HANDS OF LATE SHRI HARSHAD S. MEH TA AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUG HT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED TO DEDU CTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAYABLE TO OTHER BROKERAGE FIRM S. 3. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE INCOM E ASSESSED IN THE HAND OF THE APPELLANT WERE SUBJECTED TO THE PRO VISIONS OF TDS AND HENCE ON THE SAID AMOUNT OF TAX, NO INTERES T CAN BE COMPUTED U/S.234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE OF YOUR HONOUR TO ADD TO, ALTER, AMEND AND / OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE FOREGOING G ROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE WAS A PRIVATE LTD. INCORPORATED IN INDIA. IT IS ONE OF THE ENTITIES B ELONGING TO THE HARSHAD S. MEHTA GROUP. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNTS WERE NOT AUDITED. IN FACT, THE ASSESSEES BOOKS WERE INCOMPLETE. NOTICES U/S.142(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) WERE ISSUED ON 23.03.1995, 18.11.1996 AND 28.11.1996. T HE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED. HOWEVER, HE SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF DIVIDEND AND INTEREST INCO ME AND RAISED THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CONTENDED THAT IN VIEW OF THE LETTER DATED ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 3 17.01.1997 AND IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF SPECIAL COUR T DATED 20.02.1995, INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A, 234B AND 234C IS NOT CHARGEABLE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNTS AND T.D.S. CERTIFICATES. THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE EXPLAINED THE VARIOUS CREDIT AND DEBIT ENTRIES AND ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE CREDIT FOR TAX DEDUCTED A T SOURCE. IN BRIEF THE ISSUES WERE INVOLVED WITH REGARD TO THE CHARGEABILI LTY TO TAX OF THE DIVIDEND AND INTEREST INCOME ON THE INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSM ENT WAS COMPLETED BY ASSESSING OFFICER BY ASSESSING THE TAX TO THE TUNE OF RS.1,53,10,103/-. FEELING AGGRIEVED THE APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE C IT(A) WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BUT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SATISFI ED, THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY RAISING THE POINTS MENTION ED ABOVE. ISSUE NO.1:- 4. AT THE TIME OF ARGUMENT THIS ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN PRESSED BEFORE US, THEREFORE, THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOU R OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BEING NOT PRESSED. ISSUE NO.2:- 5. UNDER THIS ISSUE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TOOK THE PLEA THAT HE WAS ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PA YABLE TO OTHER BROKERAGE FIRMS. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ARGUED THAT THIS ISSUE HAS DULY BEEN COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESS EES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.2002-03 AND 20 06-07 DATED 16.10.2015, THEREFORE, IN THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES TH E NECESSARY ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 4 DIRECTIONS CAN BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS REFUTED THE SAID CONTENTIONS. B Y GIVING THE CAREFUL THOUGHTS TO THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LEARNED RE PRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORD CAREFULLY, IT CAME INTO THE NOTICE THAT THIS MATTER OF CONTROVERSY HAS ALREADY BEEN REMANDE D TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.2002-03 AND 2006-07 DATED 16.10.2015. THE FIND ING OF THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE HAS BEEN GIVEN IN THE PARA 7 OF THE SAID ORDER WHICH IS HEREBY REPRODUCED BELOW:- 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA). THE TRIBUNAL AT PARA 5 & 6 OF ITS ORDER H AS HELD AS UNDER:- WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WHILE DISPOSING THE GROUND RELATING TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE CASE OF EMINENT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF EMINENT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. IN ITA NOS. 2139, 2140 AND 2141/MUM/2013 HAVE FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL GIVEN IN COMMON GROUP CASE OF HITESH S. ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 5 MEHTA AT PARA 2.3 OF THE ORDER AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE FINDINGS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILES OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. BEFORE CLOSING THIS ISSUE, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT THE ISSUE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SPECIAL COURT. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH THE SAID ISSUE OF INTEREST WAS ISSUED BY THE CUSTODIAN HAVE BEEN ALREADY CONCLUDED WHICH FACT HAS ALREADY BEEN RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WE, THEREFORE, DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO CONSIDER THIS FACT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH. THE LD. CIT(A) MAY ALSO DIRECT FOR THE TAXING OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE RECIPIENT (FAMILY MEMBERS) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THEM AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. GROUND NO.4 IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 6 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDIN ATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRE SH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN HEREINABOVE. GRO UND NO.2 OF THE CAPTIONED APPEALS IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-O RDINATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WHO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS GI VEN IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.20 02-03 AND 2006-07 DATED 16.10.2015 BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS HEREBY DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE REVEN UE. THIS ISSUE IS HEREBY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ISSUE NO.3&4:- 7. ISSUE NO.3 AND 4 ARE INTER CONNECTED, THEREFORE, ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR ADJUDICATION. THE LEARNED REPRESEN TATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ARGUED THAT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ABO VE SAID ISSUES THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESS EES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DATED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y. 2007-08 AND 2009-10 HAS ALREADY PASSED THE ORDER WHICH IS R EQUIRED TO BE FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ACCORDINGLY DIR ECTIONS CAN BE ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 7 GIVEN. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DATED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y.2007 -08 AND 2009-10 HAS BEEN PERUSED WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UND ER:- 9. GROUND NO.6 RELATES TO THE CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S.234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 10. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBU NAL IN ONE OF THE GROUP CASES VIZ., M/S. HARSH ESTATES PVT . LTD. IN ITA NO. 1035, 1033 AND 3464/MUM/2013. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. 11. THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE AT PARA- 6 OF ITS ORDER AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST LIABILITY AS PER THE PROVISI ONS OF THE LAW. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.6 IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8. IN VIEW OF THE FINDING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DATED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y.2007 -08 AND 2009-10 WE SET ASIDE THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) ON T HIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 8 INTEREST LIABILITY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. W E DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. GROUND NO. 3 & 4 ARE HEREBY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. GROUND NO.5:- 9. GROUND NO.5 IS FORMAL IN NATURE WHICH IS NOWHERE REQUIRE ADJUDICATION. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ORDERED TO BE PARTLY ALLOWED. ITA NO.2133/MUM/2015:- 11. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT AS PER THE DECISION OF HONBLE SPE CIAL COURT DATED 30.04.2010 IN MP NO.41 OF 1999, THE ASSETS UN DER CONSIDERATION AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL INCOME BELONGS TO LATE SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND HENCE THE INCOME CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TAXED IN THE HANDS OF LATE SHRI HARSHAD S. MEH TA AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERR ED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF AUDIT FEES CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENTITLED TO DEDU CTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAYABLE TO OTHER BROKERAGE FIRM S. 4. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE INCOM E ASSESSED IN ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 9 THE HAND OF THE APPELLANT WERE SUBJECTED TO THE PRO VISIONS OF TDS AND HENCE ON THE SAID AMOUNT OF TAX, NO INTERES T CAN BE COMPUTED U/S.234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE OF YOUR HONOUR TO ADD TO, ALTER, AMEND AND / OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE FOREGOING G ROUNDS OF APPEAL 12. THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE QUITE SIMILAR TO THE ABOVE SAID ITA NO.2132/MUM/2015 HOWEVER THE FIGURES ARE DIFFER ENT. ISSUE NO.1 & 2:- 13. AT THE TIME OF ARGUMENT THESE ISSUES HAS NOT BE EN PRESSED BEFORE US, THEREFORE, THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN DECIDE D IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BEING NOT PRESSED. ISSUE NO.3:- 14. UNDER THIS ISSUE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TOOK THE PLE A THAT HE WAS ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PA YABLE TO OTHER BROKERAGE FIRMS. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ARGUED THAT THIS ISSUE HAS DULY BEEN COVERED BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE I N ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.2002-03 AND 2006-07 DATED 16 .10.2015, THEREFORE, IN THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES THE NECESSARY DIRECTIONS CAN BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE HAS REFUTED THE SAID CONTENTIONS. BY GIVING THE CAREFUL THOUGHTS T O THE CONTENTION ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 10 RAISED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE RECORD CAREFULLY, IT CAME INTO THE NOTICE THAT THIS MATTER OF CONTROVERSY HAS ALREADY BEEN REMANDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESS EES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.2002-03 AND 20 06-07 DATED 16.10.2015. THE FINDING OF THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE HAS BEEN GIVEN IN THE PARA 7 OF THE SAID ORDER WHICH IS HEREBY REPRODUCED BELOW:- 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA). THE TRIBUNAL AT PARA 5 & 6 OF ITS ORDER H AS HELD AS UNDER:- WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WHILE DISPOSING THE GROUND RELATING TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE CASE OF EMINENT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF EMINENT HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. IN ITA NOS. 2139, 2140 AND 2141/MUM/2013 HAVE FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL GIVEN IN COMMON GROUP CASE OF HITESH S. MEHTA AT PARA 2.3 OF THE ORDER AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE FINDINGS ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 11 OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILES OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. BEFORE CLOSING THIS ISSUE, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT THE ISSUE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SPECIAL COURT. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH THE SAID ISSUE OF INTEREST WAS ISSUED BY THE CUSTODIAN HAVE BEEN ALREADY CONCLUDED WHICH FACT HAS ALREADY BEEN RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WE, THEREFORE, DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO CONSIDER THIS FACT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH. THE LD. CIT(A) MAY ALSO DIRECT FOR THE TAXING OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE RECIPIENT (FAMILY MEMBERS) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THEM AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. GROUND NO.4 IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDIN ATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRE SH IN ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 12 THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN HEREINABOVE. GRO UND NO.2 OF THE CAPTIONED APPEALS IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 15. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WHO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS GI VEN IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1310 & 1311/MUM/ 2014 FOR A.Y.20 02-03 AND 2006-07 DATED 16.10.2015 BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDING THI S ISSUE IS HEREBY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ISSUE NO.4&5:- 16. ISSUE NO.3 AND 4 ARE INTER CONNECTED, THEREFORE , ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR ADJUDICATION. THE LEARNED REPRESEN TATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ARGUED THAT IN CONNECTION WITH THE SAI D ISSUE THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DATED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y.2007 -08 AND 2009-10 HAS ALREADY PASSED THE ORDER WHICH IS REQUI RE TO FOLLOW IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ACCORDINGLY DIRECTIONS CAN BE GIVEN. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DA TED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y.2007-08 AND 2009-10 HAS BEEN PER USED WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 13 9. GROUND NO.6 RELATES TO THE CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S.234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 10. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBU NAL IN ONE OF THE GROUP CASES VIZ., M/S. HARSH ESTATES PVT . LTD. IN ITA NO. 1035, 1033 AND 3464/MUM/2013. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. 11. THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE AT PARA- 6 OF ITS ORDER AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST LIABILITY AS PER THE PROVISI ONS OF THE LAW. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.6 IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 17. IN VIEW OF THE FINDING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY T HE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.5135&5136/MUM/2012 DATED 05.03.2015 FOR A.Y.2007 -08 AND 2009-10 WE SET ASIDE THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) ON T HIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST LIABILITY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. W E DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. GROUND NO. 3 & 4 ARE HEREBY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. GROUND NO.6:- 18. GROUND NO.5 IS FORMAL IN NATURE WHICH IS NOWHER E REQUIRE ADJUDICATION. ITA NO.2132&2133/M/2015 A.Y.1994-95 & 1997-98 14 19. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ORDERED TO BE PARTLY ALLOWED. 20. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO BE PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH MARCH, 2017 . SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (AMARJIT SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 29 TH #$ , 2017 MP & '$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. ) / CIT 5. , , , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. + -$ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, ! ! //TRUE COPY// / /(DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI