DCIT 8(3), MUMBAI V. SHREE PAR FRAGRANCE P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2502/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 250219914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARTHA SARATHI NAIK
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2502/MUM./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 ) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI .. APPELLANT V/S SHREE PAR FRAGRANCE PVT. LTD. 981, SOLITAIR CORPORATE PARK ANDHERI-GHATKOPER LINK ROAD CHAKALA, ANDHERI, MUMBAI 400 102 PAN AAFCS3683K .... RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : MR. PARTHASARATHI NAIK ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING 07.09.2011 DATE OF ORDER 16.09.2011 O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 7 TH JANUARY 2010, PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-XVIII, MUMBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-0 8. THE SOLE DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL IS, WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSIONER (AP PEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 80IB B Y THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT EITHER. UND ER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE BENCH WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUES APPEAL CAN BE DISPOSED OFF ON MERIT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF SHREE PAR FRAGRANCE PVT. LTD. ITA NO.2502/M./2010 2 THE APPEAL ON MERIT QUA THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE AND AFTER HEARING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE. 3. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE, MR. PARTHASARATHI NAIK, ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, WE FI ND THAT THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), AT PARA-6 OF HIS ORDER, HELD AS FOLLOWS: - 6. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06, TH E HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER. FOR A.Y. 2006-07, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITI ON VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 12.11.2008. THE ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED IN GREAT DETAIL IN THE ORDER OF HONBLE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.11.2007 FOR THE A.Y. 2 004-05. 4. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), THEREAFTER AT PARA-7, A PPLIED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSME NT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06 AND GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. WE DO N OT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). CONSEQUENT LY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND DISMISS TH E GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 2. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH SEPTEMBER 2011 SD/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 16 TH SEPTEMBER 2011 COPY TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE RESPONDENT; (3) THE CIT(A), MUMBAI, CONCERNED; (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, F BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI