ITO 9(2)(4), MUMBAI V. EPIC ENERGY LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3152/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3105 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR P. MENON
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional depreciation; Tax effect

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (JM) I.T.A. NO. 3152/MUM/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 ) ITO-9(2)(4) ROOM NO. 259A 2 ND FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020. VS . M/S. EPIC ENERGY LTD. 304, A WING, WINSWAY COMPLEX, OLD POLICE LANE OPP. ANDHERI RAILWAY STATION, ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI-400 069. PAN : AAACF0843P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI VIJAY KUMAR P. MENON DATE OF HEARING 02.11.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05.11.2020 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) :- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [IN SHORT LEAR NED CIT(A)] DATED 27.2.2019 AND PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2015-16. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW, THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN: '1. DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.L,14,6O,684/- RIGHTLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASE OF ASSETS FROM FOREIGN COUNTRY AND WHICH WE RE INSTALLED AT 'ALPHARETTA', USA. 2.ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE BEFOR E HIM WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A(1) OF THE I. T.RULES 1962. 3.ADMITTING THE EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH OUT RECORDING THE REASONS IN WRITING FOR DOING SO WHICH IS IN VIOLATIO N OF RULE 46A(2) OF THE I. T. RULES 1962. M/S. EPIC ENERGY LTD. 2 4.ADMITTING THE EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE WI THOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE BUT THE SAID, WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A(3) OF THE I.T. RULES , 1962. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE TAX EFFEC T IN THIS CASE IS BELOW RS. 50,00,000 FIXED BY CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 DT 8/8/2019 FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. HENCE THIS APPEAL BY THE RE VENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. PER CONTRA LD DR COULD NOT DISPUTE THAT THE TAX EFF ECT IS BELOW THE SAID LIMIT. HE COULD NOT POINT OUT THAT THE APPEAL FALLS IN ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS CARVED IN SAID CIRCULAR. 4. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE FIND THAT, AS THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW THE LIMIT FIXED BY CBDT FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE I TAT. HENCE THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 5. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED AS SUCH. ORDER PRONOUNCED UNDER RULE 34(4) OF THE ITAT RULE S BY PLACING THE RESULT ON NOTICE BOARD ON 05.11.2020. SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 05/11/2020 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI