DCIT,Cir.-8, Pune V. M/s. Anant Enterprises, Pune

ITA 285/PUN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 49863 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANN KAPTUAMA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I C SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G S PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO 285/PN/10 (ASSTT. YEAR: 2006-07) DY. COMMISSIONER OF I.T .. APPELLANT CIR. 8, PUNE VS. ANANT ENTERPRISES, .. RESPONDENT F-11, PLOT NO 4/1, MIDC, PIMPRI, PUNE PAN AACFA 0876G AND C.O NO 10/PN/2011 (IN ITA NO 285/PN/2010 AY 2006-07) ANANT ENTERPRISES, .. CROSS OBJECTOR PUNE VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, .. RESPONDE NT CIR.8, PUNE ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M K KULKARNI DEPARTMENT BY: SMT ANN KAPTUAMA ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJE CTION BY THE ASSESSEE, WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY . 2. BOTH THE REVENUES APPEAL AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SAME ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V, PUNE DATED 04.11.2009 WHICH, IN TURN, HA S ARISEN OUT OF THE 2 ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 08.12.2008 PASSED UND ER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 3. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL RE ADS AS FOLLOWS: 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN NOT TREATING THE PATTERN AND DIES AS DEPRECIABLE ASSETS ON TH E LINES OF HONBLE ITAT BANGALORES DECISION IN THE CASE OF B P L REFRIGERATION LTD. V ACI T (2005) 272 ITR (AT) 47 WHEREIN MOULDS WERE HELD TO BE A KIND OF DIES? 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE PATTERNS AND DIES ARE PA RT AND PARCEL OF PLANT AND MACHINERY AND THEREFORE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON THESE IS A CAPITAL E XPENDITURE? 3. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) MAY BE VACATED AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. AT THE TIME OF H EARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE HAD BEEN THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF CONSIDERATION BEFORE A CO-ORDINATE BEN CH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND THE TRIBUN AL VIDE ORDER DATED16.07.2010 IN ITA NO 261/PN/09 HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE, THOUGH DEFENDED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, DID NOT CONTROVERT THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. UNDER THESE CIR CUMSTANCES, WE HEREBY FOLLOW THE PRECEDENT, AND AFFIRM THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE S TREATMENT OF EXPENDITURE ON DYES AND MOULDS AS A REVENUE EXPENDITU RE. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS MERELY IN SU PPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND, IN VIEW OF OUR ABOVE DECISION AFFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), THE CROSS OBJECTION TOO STANDS DISMISSED. 6. RESULTANTLY, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WEL L AS THE CROSS OBJECTION OF ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 3 DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011. SD/- SD/- (I.C. SUDHIR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE: DATED: 30 TH JUNE, 2011 B COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-V, PUNE 4. THE CIT-V, PUNE 4. THE D.R, B BENCH,PUNE 5. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR