DCIT RG 8(2), MUMBAI V. PERIWINKLE FASHIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3744/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4122 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ./ I.T.A. NO.3744/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) JT. C.I.T., 8(2)(OSD),MUMBAI R.NO.209, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020. / VS. M/S. PERIWINKLE FASHIONS PVT LTD 401/B, ELEGANT BUSINESS PARK, MIDC CROSS ROAD, ANDHERI(E), MUMBAI-400 093. ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. AADCP 3365M ( /APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJESH OJHA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIPUL JOSHI / DATE OF HEARING : 13/01/2016 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01/02/2016 $% / O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2012 OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-17, MUMBAI (HE REINAFTER CALLED AS THE CIT(A) ) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 ITA NO.3744/MUM/2012 JT. C.I.T VS. M/S. PERIWINKLE FASHIONS PVT. LTD 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT AND THEREBY MODIFYING HIS EARLIER APPELLATE ORDER DATED 29.09.2011 PASSED UND ER SECTION 250 OF THE ACT, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT IN THE SAID ORDER DA TED 29.09.2011, THERE WAS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AS ENVISAGED IN SEC TION 154 OF THE ACT, TO WARRANT ANY SUCH RECTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN REDUCING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 24(B) OF THE ACT OF RS.50,23,473/- TO RS.6,51,900/- WHICH HAD BEEN ENHA NCED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FROM RS.15,32,900/- TO RS.50,23,473/-, WITHOUT APPR ECIATING THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO WARRANT AND JUSTIFY SUCH R EDUCTION AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT OPENING BALANCE OF LOAN HAD BEEN INVESTED IN HOUSE PROPERTY AND HENCE THE CORRE SPONDING INTEREST WAS ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 24(B) OF THE ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN REDUCING THE ENHANCED DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST UNDE R SECTION 24(B) OF THE ACT, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESEE HAD FAIL ED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 24(B) OF THE ACT IN SPIT E OF SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED BY THE CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 251(2) OF THE ACT. 3 ITA NO.3744/MUM/2012 JT. C.I.T VS. M/S. PERIWINKLE FASHIONS PVT. LTD 2. AT THE OUTSET THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS BELOW RS.10.00 LAKHS AND FURTHER SUBMITTE D THAT IN VIEW OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.21/2015, DATED 10.12.2015 BROUGHT OUT BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FI NANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, THE APPEAL WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND BE DISMISSED. T HE LD. DR ALSO AGREED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND FROM THE RECORDS BEFORE US THAT THE TAX INV OLVED IN THE DISPUTED ISSUE IS BELOW RS.10 LACS AND THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRC ULAR NO 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 NO APPEALS SHOULD BE FILED BY THE RE VENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH HAS TAX EFFECT OF RS. 10.00 LACS OR LESS AND THIS CIRCULAR IS ALSO APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL PENDING APPEALS. THE RELEVAN T EXTRACT THE SAID CBDT CIRCULAR (SUPRA) IS AS UNDER:- THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PEN DING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/TRIBUNALS. PENDI NG APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRA WN/NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE IN STRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 4 ITA NO.3744/MUM/2012 JT. C.I.T VS. M/S. PERIWINKLE FASHIONS PVT. LTD 4. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE R EVENUE, IS THEREFORE DISMISSED. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01 FEBRUARY, 2016 SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (RAJESH KUMAR) &' $ / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) MUMBAI; *$ DATED : 01.02.2016 PS. ASHWINI / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. + ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. + / CIT - CONCERNED 5. ./0 ''12 , 12# , ( ) / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 045 6 / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / !'# (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) #$ %, ( ) / ITAT, MUMBAI.