The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad V. Techno Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 3376/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8061 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Deemed dividend
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 3376/AHD/2014 DCIT VS. TECHNO INDUSTRIES LTD ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD A BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND MAHAVIR PRASAD JM] ITA NO. 3376/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 DCIT ..........APPELLANT CIRCLE 4 (1)(2), AHMEDABAD VS TECHNO INDUSTRIES LTD. ......RESPONDENT PLOT NO.5002, PHASE-IV, GIDC, VATVA, AHMEDABAD [PAN : AABCT 6416 B] APPEARANCES BY JAYANT JHAVERI FOR THE APPLICANT JAY SHAH FOR THE RESPONDENT ORDER RESERVED ON : NOVEMBER 27, 2017 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : NOVEMBER 27, 2017 D I C T A T E D O R D E R PER BENCH : 1. THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.09.2014 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-XIV, AHMEDABAD IN T HE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AS FOLLOWS : WHETHER THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS ) IS RIGHT IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.41,88,596/- MA DE BY THE AO U/S 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 3. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, ONE SHRI JAY SHAH, WHO IS STATED TO BE AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2017 PASSED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT, ON THE MATERIALLY IDENTICAL ITA NO. 3376/AHD/2014 DCIT VS. TECHNO INDUSTRIES LTD ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 2 FACTS IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PR ECEDING YEAR, IDENTICAL ADDITION IN RESPECT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND WAS DELETED BY THE CO-OR DINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL. HE THUS POINTS OUT THAT THIS MATTER IS COVERED IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. HE THUS URGES US TO CONFIRM THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE MATTER. 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHE R HAND, FAIRLY ACCEPTS THAT THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS COVERED AGAINST THE REVENU E INASMUCH AS THE CIT(A), IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, HAS MERELY FOLLOWED THE ORDER FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). HE, HOWEVER , PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, PARTICULARLY THE EL ABORATE DISCUSSION MADE BY HIM ON THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION. OUR ATTENTION IS ALSO IN VITED IN PARTICULAR TO PARAGRAPH NO.3.22 AT PAGE NO.19 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVING PE RUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE SEE NO REASON TO TAKE ANY OTHER VIEW OF THE MATT ER THAN THE VIEW SO TAKEN BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSE SSMENT YEAR. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE CONFIRM THE RELIEF GRANTED B Y THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER DI CTATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR PRASAD PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 27 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017 **BT* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD