BAKLIWAL CORPORATE SRVICES P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2296/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8464 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 07-02-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S SRIVASTAV
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL J SATHE
• Keywords: Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 28

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES I , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL, J.M. AND SHRI RAJENDRA SI NGH, A.M. I.T.A. NO.2296/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. BAKLIWAL CORPORATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. 19/21, AMBALAL DOSHI MARG, 63, BOMBAY MUTUAL CHAMBERS, FORT, MUMBAI 400 023 P.A. NO: AABCB4945P VS. THE ACIT, CIR. 2(1), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANIL J. SATHE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. S. SRIVASTAV ORDER PER D.K. AGARWAL, J.M: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2010 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 TAKING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN T REATING THE SEBI TURNOVER FEES OF RS.17,71,490/- AND STOCK EXCHANGE EXPENSES OF RS.60,500/- AS PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AND CONSEQUENT LY ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE SAME. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM OF BAD DEBTS A MOUNTING TO RS.90,000/-. M/S. BAKLIWAL CORPORATE SERVICES ITA NO.2296/MUM/2010 2 3. IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT A LLOWING THE SUM OF RS.90,000/- AS REVENUE LOSS UNDER SECTION 28 OF THE I.T.ACT. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE FILED A LETTER DATED 07.02.2011 INTERALIA STATED THAT HOWEVER SINCE THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT THE GROUNDS ARE PRESENTLY NOT AVAILABLE WIT H THE APPELLANT, WE HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. IT WAS, TH EREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL FILE D WHICH WAS NOT OBJECTED TO BY THE LD. DR. 3. THAT BEING SO AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUPPORTI NG MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE APP EAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS DISMISSED BEING WITHDRAWN. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011. SD/- SD/- ( RAJENDRA SINGH ) (D.K. A GARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DT: 11 TH FEBRUARY, 2011. ROSHANI M/S. BAKLIWAL CORPORATE SERVICES ITA NO.2296/MUM/2010 3 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT, 2. THE RESPONDENT, 3. THE C.I.T. 4. CIT (A) 5. THE DR, I - BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI