NITCO LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 46, MUMBAI

ITA 2529/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6981 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , JM ITA NO. 2529/MUM/2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 - 06 ) ITA NO. 2856/MUM/2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 ) ITA NO. 2857/MUM/2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 09 - 10 ) ITA NO. 2858/MUM/2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ) M/S. NITCO LTD., RECONDO ESTATE INSIDE MUNICIPAL ASPHALT COMPOUND, S.K. AHIRE MARG WORLI, MUMBAI - 400030 VS. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 46, AAYAKAR BHAVAN 6 TH FLOOR, QUEENS ROAD, MUMBAI - 400002 PAN/GIR NO . AAACN1674N ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) CORRIGENDUM ORDER THIS CORRIGENDUM ORDER IS PASSED TO RECTIFY A TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE IN ORDER DATED 18/12/2018 FOR A.Y.2005 - 06 WHICH IS AS UNDER: - 2. AT PAGE 22, PARA 43 OF THE ORDER AT LAST LINE IT HAS BEEN TYPED AS WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT FOR THE 50% DISALLOWANCE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSPORTATION. ACCORDINGLY, AO IS DIRECTED TO RESTRICT THE SAME TO 10%. 3. AFTER 50%, THE WORDS AND 100% ARE TO BE ADDED. AC CORDINGLY, WE RECTIFY THE TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE AND DIRECT THAT LAST LINE SHOULD BE READ AS: ITA NO.2852/MUM/2014 AND OTHER APPEALS M/S. NITCO LTD., 2 WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT FOR THE 50% AND 100% DISALLOWANCE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSPORTATION. ACCORDINGLY, AO IS DI RECTED TO RESTRICT THE SAME TO 10%. 4. FURTHER, IN SAME ORDER, CORRIGENDUM ORDER IS PASSED TO RECTIFY A TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE FOR A.Y.2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 WHICH IS AS UNDER: - AT PAGE 31, PARA 63 OF THE ORDER AT LAST LINE IT HAS BEEN TYPED AS 5% OF THE EXPENDITURE IN PLACE OF 5% OF THE EXPENDITURE DISALLOWED BY AO. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECTIFY THE TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE AND DIRECT THAT LAST LINE SHOULD BE READ AS WE DIRECT THE AO TO RESTRICT THE DISALLOWANCE TO THE EXTENT OF 5% OF THE EXPENDITURE DISAL LOWED BY AO. SD/ - ( RAM LAL NEGI ) SD/ - (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 07 / 01 /201 9 KARUNA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//