Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1302 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-11-2016
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
DB
Next Hearing Date
08-06-2016
Assessment Year
2010-2011
Appeal Filed On
26-06-2014
Judgement Text
1 ITA NO. 353/NAG/2014. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER.. I.T.A.NO.353/NAG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, M/S GRACE INDUSTRIES LTD. CENTRAL CIRCLE CIR - 2(3), VS. A - 37, TADALI GROUP CENTRE, ROOM NO 312, 3RD FLOO R, AAYAKAR CHANDRAPUR, DIST. CHANDRAPUR. BHAWAN, CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR. PAN AACCG2424R APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.R. NINAWE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.P. DEWANI. DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 11 - 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 TH NOV.., 2016 O R D E R. PER RAM LAL NEGI , JM. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28/3/2013 PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) - III, NAGPUR PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 WHEREBY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE AGAINST ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS : - 1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHE R THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS 32,883/ - DISALLOWANCE OF PROPORTIONATE EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD FINANCIAL CHARGESWITHOUT 2 ITA NO. 353/NAG/2014. APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT SUCH EXPENDITURE IS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT REQUIRED FOR PURCHASES AND S ALE THROUGH ACCOMMODATION BILLS. 2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS. 32.883/ - TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE MADE OUT OF EXPENDITURE TOWARDS FINANCIAL CHARGES, THOUGH ON SIMILAR ISSUE IN THE GUPTA GROUP OF CASES, THE LD. CIT (A) - XVI, MUMBAI, WHO WAS HOLDING CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OF CIT (A) - 1, NAGPUR, HAS GRANTED PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE, TREATING SUBJECTIVITY OF INDULGING IN NON - DELIVERY BASED TRADING, AS SPECULATIVE TRAN SACTION. 3) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 22,54,976/ - TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE OF EXCESS DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GEN UINENESS OF PAYMENTS MADE TO THE CONTRACTORS. 4) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.22,54,976/ - TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS DEPOSITION, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT SHRI RAHESHKUMAR BEDI HAD STATED THAT HI S UNCLE, LATE SHRI KRISHNAKUMAR SINGH BEDI HEAD NOT EXECUTED ANY CONTRACT WORK OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT SHRI R. SUBRAMANIUM TO WHOM CONTRACT AMOUNTS WERE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE, IS NOT A CIVIL CONTRACT, BUT ONLY AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 5) ON THE F ACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.22,54,976/ - TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE OF EXCESS CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ESTABLISHED FROM EXAMINATION OF BANK ACCOUNT OF LATE SHRI KRISHN AKUMAR SINGH BEDI THAT THE RECEIPT FROM THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD BEEN IMMEDIATELY TRANSFERRED TO THE ACCOUNTS OF VARIOUS OTHER CONCERNS OF SHRI MUKESH GUPTA GROUP. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THI S CASE IS BELOW RS.10,00 ,000/ - AS THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION IN DISPUTE IS ONLY RS. 22,87,859/ - AND AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015, DATED 10/12/2015, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 3 ITA NO. 353/NAG/2014. 4. THE LD. DR FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN D EPARTMENTS APPEAL IS BELOW RS.10 LAKHS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN APPEAL DOES NOT FALL UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS SPECIFIED IN PARA 8 OF THE CIRCULAR. SINCE, IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR AFORESAID THAT THE INSTRUCTION WILL A PPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS, THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE SAME IN LIMINE . 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE AY 2010 - 11 ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF NOV., 2016. SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAMIM YAHYA) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACOUNTANT MEMBER. JUDICIAL MEMBER. NAGPUR, DATED: 25 TH NOV. , 2016. COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT. . 2. RESPONDENT. 3. C.I.T. - (CENTRAL), NAGPUR. 4. CIT(APPEALS), - III, NAGPUR. 5. D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WAKODE.
