DEEPIKA A MEHTA, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 23, MUMBAI

ITA 3816/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 381619914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P DANIEL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3816/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 SMT. DEEPIKA A. MEHTA 32, MADHULI, 3 RD FLOOR, DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD, NEHRU CENTRE, WORLI, MUMBAI-400 018 PAN :ABNPM 8231 D VS. DCIT, C.C. 23, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DHARMESH SHAH REVENUE BY : DR. P. DANIEL DATE OF HEARING : 18.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.02.2014 O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-40, MUMBAI DATED 15.02.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 3-04. 2. GROUNDS NO. 1, 2 & 3 OF THE APPEAL ARE NOT PRESS ED AND HENCE THE SAME DO NOT REQUIRE ADJUDICATION. 3. GROUND NO. 4 RELATES TO THE ACTION OF THE LD.CIT (A) IN CONFIRMING RESPECTIVELY THE LIABILITY AMOUNTING TO RS.88,12,179/- TOWARDS INTER EST EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES GROUP OF CASES IN HITESH MEHTA - ITA NOS. 7726 & 7727/MUM/2010 WHILE DECIDING A SIMILAR ISSUE HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS: GROUND NO. 4 RELATES TO THE ACTION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE LIABILITIES AMOUNTING TO RS.11,24,99,052/- AND RS.12,61,36,245/ - RESPECTIVELY FOR THE A.YS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 TOWARDS INTEREST EXPENDITURE C LAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN PARA 3 .3 ABOVE IN RESPECT OF REJECTION/RELIABILITY OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE PROPOSED ADJUDICA TION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE SAID DIRECTION MAY HAVE DI RECT IMPACT ON THE ISSUE OF THE IMPUGNED LIABILITY, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE ALSO TO THE FILES OF THE LD.CIT(A) TO ITA NO. 3816/MUM/2011 SMT. DEEPIKA A. MEHTA ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 2 ADJUDICATE AFRESH ALONG WITH THE ADJUDICATION OF TH E RESPECTIVE GROUND PERTAINING TO THE REJECTION/RELIABILITY OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN VIEW OF THAT MATTER, WE, BY FOLLOWING THE FINDIN GS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE AFOREMENTIONED CASE, SET ASIDE THE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CI T(A) TO ADJUDICATE AFRESH IN THE LINE OF SIMILAR DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE ITAT AS AFOREMENTION ED. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS NO. 4 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 4 . VIDE LETTER DATED 17.02.2014, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAIS ED THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WHICH READS AS UNDER: THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT AS PER THE DECISION OF HONBLE SPECIAL COURT DATED 30.04.2010 IN MP NO. 41 OF 1999 , THE ASSETS UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL INCOME BELONGS TO SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND HENCE THE INCOME ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TAXED IN THE HANDS OF SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND NOT IN THE H ANDS OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ITAT, IN THE CA SE OF HITESH MEHTA, A GROUP CASE FOR THE AYS 1994-95, 1995-96 & 2001-02 HAS DECIDED A SIMILA R ADDITIONAL GROUND, THE ADJUDICATION OF WHICH READS AS UNDER: 4. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN APPLICATION DATE D 27.05.2010 FOR ADMITTING THE FOLLOWING GROUND:- 1. THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT AS PER THE DECISION OF HONBLE SPECIAL COURT DATED 30.04.2010 IN M.P. NO. 41 OF 1999, THE ASSETS UNDER CONSIDERATION AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL INCOME BELONGS TO SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND HENCE, THE INCOME ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TAXED IN THE HANDS OF SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. 5. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL GROUND FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE NOTED THAT THE GROUND IS LEGAL GROUND, WHICH DOES NOT REQ UIRE ANY NEW FACTS TO BE BROUGHT ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE H ONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD. VS. CIT, REPORTED I N (1998) 229 ITR 383, THE LEGAL GROUND CAN BE ADMITTED, IF NO NEW FACTS ARE TO BE B ROUGHT ON RECORD. HOWEVER, AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS INVOLVED HERE BEFORE US, WE FOUND THAT THE GROUND IS FULLY ACADEMIC IN NATURE FOR THE REASON THAT IF THE HONB LE SUPREME COURT DECIDES SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE FOLLOWED WITHOUT ANY DISPU TE. THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IS LAW OF LAND, WHICH HAS TO BE FOLLOWED BY EVERY AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, IN OUR VIEW, NO DIRECTION IS TO BE REQUIRED TO BE G IVEN TO THE AO IN THIS RESPECT BECAUSE IF THE HONBLE APEX COURT DECIDES THAT ALL THE INCOME BELONGS TO SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA, THEN THE INCOME HAS TO BE ASSESSE D IN THE HANDS OF SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA, NOT IN THE HANDS OF ANY OTHER PER SON. THEREFORE, IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS NO NEED TO ISSUE ANY DIRECTION AS THE DECI SION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS TO BE FOLLOWED IN ANY CASE. ACCORDINGLY, BY ADMITTING THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ALL THESE YEARS, WE TREAT THE S AME AS ACADEMIC IN NATURE. ITA NO. 3816/MUM/2011 SMT. DEEPIKA A. MEHTA ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 3 IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DISTINGUISHING FACT BROUGHT O N RECORD BY THE PARTIES FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WE, FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL, DECIDE THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IN THE SAME MANNER AS AFOREMENTIONED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 1 ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 21.02.2014. *SRIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR D BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.