Jyothiskar Marketing Services Private Limited, CHENNAI V. ITO Company Ward II(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2386/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7285 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: N VIJAY KUMAR
• Keywords: Recovery proceedings

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , ! . '#'$ , % !& ' [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] S.P.NO.280/CHNY/2018 ( IN ./I.T.A. NO.2386/CHNY/2018) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008. M/S. JYOTHISHKAR MARKETING SERVICES PVT LTD, NO.62, OLD NO.328, VEERABHADRAN STREET, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-34. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER COMPANY WARD II (1), CHENNAI. ./ I.T.A. NO.2386/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008. M/S. JYOTHISHKAR MARKETING SERVICES PVT LTD, NO.62, OLD NO.328, VEERABHADRAN STREET, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI -34. [ PAN AABCJ 1451E ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER COMPANY WARD II (1), CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) ( ()*+ /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. N. VIJAY KUMAR, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. B SAGADEVAN, IRS, JCIT. /DATE OF HEARING : 28-09-2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-09-2018 SP NO.280/CHNY/2018 & ITA 2386/2018 :- 2 -: / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ASSESSEE THROUGH THIS STAY PETITION PLEADS FOR ST AY OF RECOVERY OF TAX OF C6,81,126/- AND INTEREST OF C3,4 7,414/-, AGGREGATING TO C. 10,28,540/-. 2. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT DONE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR, L D. ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE DISALLOWANCE OF C21,60,162/- AGAIN ST CLAIM OF HARBOR EXPENDITURE AND C30,78,397/- AGAINST C & F CHARGES . AS PER THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF EXPORTING AND MARKETING SERVICES AND THESE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED IN RELATION TO THE SAID BUSINESS. ACCORDING TO HIM, LD . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD DELETED DISALLOWANCE OF C3 0,78,397/- MADE AGAINST C & F CHARGES WHILE SUSTAINING THE DISALLOW ANCE OF HARBOR CHARGES. CONTENTION OF THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESEN TATIVE WAS THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESS EE HAD THROUGH ITS LETTER DATED 29.06.2009 FURNISHED TO THE LD. ASSESS ING OFFICER, LEDGER COPY OF THE C & F CHARGES, HARBOR CHARGES AND ANA LYSIS OF SUCH CHARGES. ACCORDING TO HIM, LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) HAD SOUGHT A REMAND REPORT BUT DECLINED TO CONSIDER THE REMAND REPORT OR THE EARLIER LETTER FILED WITH THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. FURTHER, AS PER THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, ASSESSEE HAD ON 11.12.2009 SP NO.280/CHNY/2018 & ITA 2386/2018 :- 3 -: FILED A REPLY TO ALL THE QUERIES RAISED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT THIS WAS ALSO IGNORED. ACCORDING TO HIM, ASSESSEE W AS HAVING SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR THE CLAIM OF HARBOR CHARGES. LD. AUTH ORISED REPRESENTATIVE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS FAC ING GREAT FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES AND HAD NO MEANS TO MAKE FURTHER PAYM ENTS. 3. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT SHOW ANY GOOD REA SON FOR GRANT OF A STAY. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THE DEMAND OUTSTANDING AROSE OUT OF DISALLOWANCE OF HARBOR CH ARGES C21,60,162/-. CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IT HAD GIVEN DETAILS OF SUCH EXPENSES TO THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER THROUGH A LETTER DATED 29 .06.2009. LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD REJECTED T HIS CLAIM NOTING THAT THERE WAS NO DATE STAMP OR STAMP OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICE ON THE COPY OF THE LETTER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO MENTION ABOUT THE REMAND REPORT ALSO. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, I T IS MENTIONED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE DISALLOWANCE HA S BEEN MADE FOR WANT OF EVIDENCE. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES A FRESH LOOK B Y THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHO RITIES IN SO FAR IT RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF HARBOUR EXPENSE OF C 21,60,162/- CLAIMED SP NO.280/CHNY/2018 & ITA 2386/2018 :- 4 -: BY THE ASSESSEE, AND REMIT IT BACK TO THE FILE OF T HE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH. ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAM , AND THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. SINCE THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED, THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE A SSESSEE HAS BECOME INFRUCTOUS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.2386/CHNY/2018 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOS E WHEREAS ITS STAY PETITION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 28 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ! . '#'$ ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / CHENNAI ! / DATED:28 TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. KV !' # $% &% / COPY TO: 1 . APPELLANT 3. . () / CIT(A) 5. %01 # 2 / DR 2. #345 / RESPONDENT 4. . / CIT 6. 16 7 / GF SP NO.280/CHNY/2018 & ITA 2386/2018 :- 5 -: