DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI V. INDUCTO STEEL LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3080/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1935 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: REEPAL G TRAISHAWALA
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2432/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 M/S. INDUCTO STEEL LIMITED, 156, MAKER CHAMBER VI, 220, JAMNALAL BAJAJ MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021 PAN: AAACI 1045E VS. ACIT, C CIRCLE - 38, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.3080/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 DCIT, 3(2), R.NO.674, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400020 VS. M/S. INDUCTO STEEL LIMITED, 156, MAKER CHAMBER VI, 220, JAMLAL BAJAJ MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021 PAN: AAACI 1045E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI REEPAL G. TRAISHAWALA, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI RAVINDER SINDHU, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 29.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.12.2015 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE ABOVE TITLED CROSS APPEALS, ONE BY THE ASSESSE E AND THE OTHER BY THE REVENUE, HAVE BEEN PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER DATE D 15.01.2014 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER R EFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. SINCE THE FAC TS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL IN NATURE, HENCE THE SA ME ARE TAKEN TOGETHER FOR DISPOSAL BY THIS COMMON ORDER. FIRST WE TAKE UP TH E ASSESSEES APPEAL. ITA NO.2432/M/2014 & ITA NO.3080/M/2014 M/S. INDUCTO STEEL LIMITED 2 ITA NO.2432/M/2014 2. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS IN RELATION TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. A.R. OF T HE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT HE IS NOT PRESSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN VI EW OF THE SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED. WE THEREFORE DISMISS THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE BEING NOT PRESSED. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT OUR ABOVE FINDINGS WILL NOT HOLD ANY BINDING PRECEDENT IN RELATION TO THE OTHER ASSESSME NT YEARS OF THE ASSESSEE, SINCE THE ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS. 3. NOW COMING TO THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I.E. ITA NO.3080/M/2014 ITA NO.3080/M/2014 4. THE REVENUE HAS AGITATED THE ACTION OF THE LD. C IT(A) IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A(1) WITHOUT PROV IDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS T HE AO) TO VERIFY THE SAME. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A), IN HIS DETAILED ORDER, HAS HELD THAT THE EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE RELEVANT AND NECESSA RY FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE CASE. HE, HOWEVER, HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO AD DUCE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO AND THE AO WOULD VERIFY SUC H EVIDENCES AND UPON VERIFICATION OF THE SAME, THE RELEVANT ADDITIONS WO ULD STAND DELETED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL O F THE REVENUE AGITATING THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED THE EVIDENCES WITHOUT G IVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO HAS ANY MERIT AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMIS SED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS WEL L AS OF THE REVENUE IS HEREBY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.12.2015. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 18 12.2015. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. ITA NO.2432/M/2014 & ITA NO.3080/M/2014 M/S. INDUCTO STEEL LIMITED 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.