MANIKA MOULDS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI V. DY CIT 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2258/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1603 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANPREET SINGH DUGGAL
• Keywords: Competent authority; Condonation of delay
• Section: 201; 80IC; 80IC; 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D , MUMBAI BEFORE S HRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM ) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) ITA NO. 2258/MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2013 - 14 MANIKA MOULDS PVT. LTD., 601 - 605, AARPEE CENTRE, GUFIC COMPOUND, MIDC, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 400093 PAN: AABCM4545Q VS. THE DCIT 10(2)(2), ROOM NO. 209, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, CHURCHAGATE, MUMBAI - 400020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI MANPREET SINGH DUGGAL (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 19 /11 /2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23 / 11 /2020 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.02.2019 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 17 (FOR SHORT THE CIT(A) , MUMBAI , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 , WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED T HE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT). 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) ON THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND : - 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING REJECTION OF THE APPELLANTS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IC ON INTEREST OF RS. 16,84,526 FROM FDR WI TH BANK. THE APPELLANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS THAT, ON FACTS AND IN LAW, DEDUCTION U/S 80IC SHOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE ABOVE INTEREST. 2 ITA NO. 2258 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 3 - 1 4 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS. 31,54,693, BEING WRITE OFF OF INVESTMEN T AND LOANS & ADVANCES TO SUBSIDIARY COMPANY VIZ. M/S AQUALINE INC. FZE, UAE. THE APPELLANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE ABOVE LOSS OF RS. 31,54,693 SHOULD BE ALLOWED. 3 . THIS CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 19.11.2020. HOWEVER, WHE N THE CASE WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE NOTICE THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION DATED 02.11.20 2 0, STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OPTED TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE UNDER VIVAD SE VISH WAS ACT, 2020, THEREFORE THE APPEALS MAY BE KEPT IN ABEYANCE. 4 . THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT OPPOSE THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION. I N THE CASE OF M/S. NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF) VS . ACIT , THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS WITHDRAWN IN WHICH THE COUNSEL HAD MADE THE SIMILAR SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT ARE AS UNDER: - 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE, ON INSTRUCTIONS, SUBMITTED THAT THE AP PELLANT / ASSESSEE INTENDS TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME (VVS SCHEME FOR BREVITY) AND IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE IS TAKING STEPS TO FILE THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN FORM NO. I. 4. IT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THIS COURT TO DECIDE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW FRAMED FOR CONSIDERATION ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENACTED THE DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT, 2020 (ACT 3 OF 2020) TO PROVIDE FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTED TAX AND FOR MATTERS CO NNECTED THEREWITH OR INCIDENTAL THERETO. THE ACT OF THE PARLIAMENT RECEIVED THE ASSENT OF THE PRESIDENT ON 17 TH MARCH 2020 AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ON 17 TH MARCH 2020. 5. IN TERMS OF THE SAID ACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GIVEN AN OPTION TO PUT AN END TO THE TAX DISPUTES, WHICH MAY BE PENDING AT DIFFERENT LEVELS EITHER BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OR BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. UNDER SECTION 2(J) DISPUTED TAX HAS BEEN DEFIN ED. IN TERMS OF SECTION 3, WHERE A DECLARANT MEANS A PERSON, WHO FILES A DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 4 ON OR BEFORE THE LAST DATE FILES A DECLARATION TO THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 4 IN 3 ITA NO. 2258 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 3 - 1 4 RESPECT OF TAX ARREARS, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT OR ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE, THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY THE DECLARANT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN TERMS OF SECTION 3(A - C) THEREUNDER. 6. THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 3 STATES THAT IN CASE, W HERE AN APPEAL OR WRIT PETITION OR SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS FILED BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY ON ANY ISSUE BEFORE THE APPELLATE FORUM, THE AMOUNT PAYABLE SHALL BE ONE - HALF OF THE AMOUNT IN THE TABLE STIPULATED IN SECTION 3 CALCULATED ON SUCH ISSUE, IN SUC H A MANNER AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. THE SECOND PROVISO DEALS WITH THE CASES, WHERE THE MATTER IS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR BEFORE THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL. THE THIRD PROVISO DEALS WITH CASES, WHERE THE ISSUE IS PENDING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APP ELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE FILING OF THE DECLARATION IS AS PER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT AND THE PARTICULARS TO BE FURNISHED ARE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SUB SECTIONS OF SECTION 4. SECTION 5 OF THE ACT DEALS WITH THE TIME AND MANNER OF THE PAYMENT AND SECTION 6 DEALS WI TH IMMUNITY FROM INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE AND IMPOSITION OF PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES. SECTION 9 OF THE ACT DEALS WITH CASES, WHERE THE ACT 3 OF 2020 WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE. 7. AS OBSERVED, THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO RESTORE T HIS APPEAL IN THE EVENT THE ULTIMATE DECISION TO BE TAKEN ON THE DECLARATION TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SAID ACT IS NOT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SUCH A PRAYER IS MADE, THE REGISTRY SHALL ENTERTAIN THE PRAYER WITHOUT INSISTING U PON ANY APPLICATION TO BE FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL AND ON SUCH REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BY FILING A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR RESTORATION, THE REGISTRY SHALL PLACE SUCH PETITION BEFORE THE DIVISION BENCH FOR ORDERS. 8. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE APPELLANT / ASSESSEE TO FILE THE FORM NO.I ON OR BEFORE 20.11.2020 AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY SHALL PROCESS THE APPLICATION / DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE PREFERABLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX (6) WEEKS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DECLARATION IS FILED IN THE PROPER FORM. 5. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED DECLARATION AND UNDERTAKING IN FORM - 1 AND 2 UNDER DIRECT TAX VIVAD SE VISHWAS ACT,2020, WE RESPEC TFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. NANNUSAMY MOHAN (HUF) VS. ACIT (SUPRA) , DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN . 4 ITA NO. 2258 / MUM/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 3 - 1 4 HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR RESTORAT ION OF APPEAL AS DISCUSSED BY THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN PARAGRAPH 7 OF THE JUDGMENT. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 3 - 201 4 IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23 RD NOVEMBER , 2020 UNDER RULE 34 (4) OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963. SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ( RAM LAL NEGI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 23 / 1 1 /2020 ALINDRA, PS / 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