ALD AUTOMOTIVE P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CIR 3(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2952/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8771 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C OMI NINGSHEN
• Assessee Lawyers: BRIJMOHAN POORANMAL AGA RWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2952/M/2015 (AY 2009 - 2010) M/S. ALD AUTOMOTIVE PVT LTD., 13 TH FLOOR, MAKER CHAMBER IV, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 21. / VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), (EARLIER DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)) R.NO.608, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020. ./ PAN : AAFCA0924K ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI BRIJMOHAN POORAN M A L AGARWAL / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.C. OMI NINGSHEN, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 11.01.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 .01.2017 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 8, MUMBAI DATED 27.2.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010. IN THIS APPEAL, THE SOLITARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - THE AO HAS ERRED IN BRINGING TO TAX AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2,02,42,605/ - BEING THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE CHARGES NOT FORMING PART OF THE INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL AND FURTHER THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NOS. 907 & 109/M/2013 FOR THE AYS 2008 - 09 AND 2007 - 08 DATED 25.7.2016 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE ALLOWABILIY OF THE MAINTENANCE OF CHARGES WAS T HE ONLY ISSUE ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. BRINGING OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 8 OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE READ OUT THE RELEVANT LINES AND PRAYED FOR SETT ING ASIDE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH IDENTICAL DIRECTIONS AS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL ALREADY FOR THE AYS 2 2007 - 08 AND 2008 - 09. RELEVANT LINES FROM THE SAI D PARA 5 (ON PAGE 8) OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER (SUPRA) READ AS UNDER: - 5........ ............. THE AO SHALL CAUSE NECESSARY VERIFICATION AS INDICATED ABOVE, SUBJECT TO WHOSE FINDINGS OF FACT WE ALLOW THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. WE MAY FURTHER ADD THAT THE ASSESSEES PLEA IS ACCEPTABLE ONLY QUA SUCH EXPENDITURE WHICH IS SUBJECT TO, IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF EVENTS, AN INCREASE WITH TIME IE IS AGE (OF THE VEHICLE) RELATED. WE SAY SO AS WE OBSERVE SEVERAL EXPENSES FORMING PART OF THE FLEET MANAGEMENT SERVICES VIZ., PROVIDING RELIEF VEHICLES, DRIVERS, EMERGENCY BREAKDOWN SERVICES, DOOR TO DOOR SERVICES ETC., A ND WHICH ARE ESSENTIALLY PERIOD COSTS, SO THAT ALL SUCH COSTS WHICH DO NOT EXHIBIT A PRONOUNCED INCREASE WITH TIME IE IN RELATION TO THE AGE OF THE CORRESPONDING VEHICLE, WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO SUCH APPROPRIATION. THE AOS FINDING SHALL FURTHER INCLUDE T HAT IN RESPECT OF REVERSAL OF THE CREDIT (ON THE BASIS OF THE RULE BEING PURPORTEDLY FOLLOWED) AS WELL. REFERENCE TO THE SAID RULE, WE MAY ADD, IS ONLY TOWARD THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWING A SCIENTIFIC BASIS IN ALLOCATING THE REVENUE OVER THE TERM OF THE LEASE AN D, ACCORDINGLY WOULD STAND TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO AND THE ALLOWANCE OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM BY US IS SUBJECT TO HIS RETURNING POSITIVE FINDINGS. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STASTICAL PURPOSES, WHILE THE REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 3. ON PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE AS WELL AS THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND, THE IS SUE OF ALLOWABILITIY OF MAINTENANCE CHARGES IS THE IDENTICAL IN BOTH THE APPEALS AND THE RESERVE CREATED FOR THE SAID CHARGES IS THE COMMON ISSUE ALREADY ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS EVIDENT FROM THE ABOVE EXTRACTED PORTION FROM THE TRIBUNALS ORDER (SUP RA). CONSIDERING THE COMMONALITY OF THE ISSUES, WITH IDENTICAL DIRECTIONS, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 8 T H JANUARY, 2017. S D / - S D / - ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 18.01.2017 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 3 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI