BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD, MUMBAI V. ADDL CIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3370/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0142 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S RAVICHANDRAN
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 115JB

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA NO. 3370 / MUM/ 20 1 5 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 11 - 12 ) BLUE DART EXPRESS LIMITED, B LUE DART CENTRE, SAHAR AIRPORT ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 4000 99 / VS. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , RANGE - 8(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ PAN : AAACB0446L ( / APPELLANT) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MS.CHANDNI SHAH /R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI S RAVICHANDRAN, / DATE OF HEARING : 2 9.6.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 5. 7 . 201 7 / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 25, MUMBAI , DATED 27.03.2015 , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 20 11 - 12 WHICH IN TURN HA VE ARISEN FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 30.9.2013 UNDER SECTION 143(3) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(IN SHORT THE ACT). 2 ITA NO 3370/ MUM/201 5 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) UPHOLDING THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE O F RS.11,05,772/ - BEING 2 .5% OF THE TOTAL CASH EXPENDITURE OF RS.4,42,30,910/ - INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON FLEET HIRE CHARGES , HANDLING AND CLEARING CHARGES. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING COURIER SERVICES AND HAS FILE D RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.9.2011 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,54,27,82,591/ - UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB OF THE ACT AT RS.1,53,14,15,594/ - . THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) AND THERE AFTER THE CASE WAS SEL ECTED FOR SCRUTIN Y AND NOTICES UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND 142(1) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE . DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AN EXPENDITURE ON HANDLING AND CLEARING EXPENSES OF RS.26,5 2,40,822/ - OUT OF WHICH RS.2,44,44,971/ - WAS INCURRED IN CASH. SIMILARLY, THE EXPENSES ON FLEET HIRE CHARGES, THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,39,40,17,828/ - OUT OF WHICH RS.1,97,85,939/ - WAS INCURRED IN CASH. THE AO MADE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE O F 2.5% OF CASH EXPENDITURE THEREBY MAKING TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS.6,11,124/ - OUT OF HANDLING AND CLEARING EXPENSES AND RS.4,94,648/ - OUT OF FLEET HIRING CHARGES AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) AT RS.154,48,81,350/ - VIDE ORDER DATED 30.9.2 013 BESIDES MAKING OTHER DISALLOWANCES. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE ON THE GROUND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT IN THE EARLIER YEAR. 3 ITA NO 3370/ MUM/201 5 4 . THE LD. AR, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMIEDTTED BEFORE US THAT THE ISSUE IS NO W COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY ASSESSEES OWN CASE BY THE ORDER CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.330 /MUM/2012 (AY - 2008 - 2009) DATED 24.5.2017. THE LD. DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD.AR. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PE RUSAL OF THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE(SUPRA) . THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE JUDGMENT IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 8. IT IS NOT DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE AD - HOC DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES OF FLEET AND HIRE CHARGES AND HANDLING AND CLEANING CHARGES ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDING OF THE LD. CITCA) IN THE PAST YEAR. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAME. THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSE E COMPANY IS TO PROVIDE THE COURIER SERVICES IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE THE PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF FLEET AND HIRE CHARGE2 AND HANDLING AND CLEANING CHARGES IN CASH. THE PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF FLEET AND HIRE CHARGES AND CLEANING CHARGES IN CASH. THE P AYMENT OF LABOUR WAS PAYABLE ALSO IN CASH ON SPOT. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PROCURE THE EACH AND EVE RY BILLS/DETAILS. IT IS NOT A CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS BOGUS. MOREOVER, WITHOUT ANY REASON AD - HOC DISALLOWANCE I S NOT JUSTIFIABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THEREFORE, WE ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE EXPENSES IN A LL ON ACCOUNT OF FLEET AND HIRE CHARGES HANDLING AND CLEANING CHARGES IN T HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE FINDING OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS I SSUE AND ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS BEING DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF T HE A SS ESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE SINCE THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US ARE MATERIALLY SAME, WE THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE C O - ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION / DISALLOWANCE OF RS.11,05,772/ - . 4 ITA NO 3370/ MUM/201 5 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OR THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5TH J U L , 2017. S D SD ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) (RAJESH KUMAR) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 7. 7 .2017 SRL,SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F ILE / BY ORDER, T RUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI