SHIMNIT UTSCH INDIA LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3874/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1702 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABDUL HAKEEM M
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH , JM ITA NO. 3874 / MUM/20 12 & 3875/MUM/2012 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 & 2008 - 09 ) M/S. SHIMNIT UTSCH INDIA PVT. LTD., 8 TH FLOOR, REGENTCHAMBERS NAR IMAN POINT MUMBAI 400 021 VS. DCIT, 3(3) MUMBAI - 400 021 PAN/GIR NO. AAFCS3812A APPELLANT ) .. RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI ABDUL HAKEEM M. DATE OF HEARING 31 / 08 /201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31 / 08 /201 8 / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M) : THESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 7, MUMBAI DATED 07/02/2012 FOR A.Y.2006 - 07 & 2008 - 09, IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE IT ACT. 2. IN THESE APPEALS , ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED FOR CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF I NTEREST EARNED ON FIXED DEPOSIT AND ALSO OFFERED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY ISSUE OF NOTICES, HOWEVER, EVEN AFTER ISSUE AND SERVICE OF VARIOUS NOTICE S , NO BODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. THE CASE WAS FIRST HEARD ON 17/10/2017, THEREAFTER IT WAS PUT FOR CLARIFICATION ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2012 & 3875/MUM/2012 M/S. SHIMNIT UTSCH INDIA PVT. LTD., 2 AS NOBODY WAS PRESENT WHEN THE CASE WAS ORIGINALLY HEAR D ON FOLLOWING DATES. 1. 02/01/2018 2. 02 /04/2018 3. 25/04/2018 4. 01/06/2018 5. 29/06/2018 3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACT, BENCH FINALLY DECIDED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AND HEARING THE DR. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURING AUTOMOBILE AND AUTO PARTS. FOR THE A.Y.2006 - 07 RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A Y.2006 - 07 WAS FURNISHED ON 22/11/2006 DISCLOSING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.86,04,619/ - . THE CASE WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) ON 27/1 1/2007 AT THE RETURNED INCOME. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICES U/S. 143(2) WAS ISSUED ON 03/10/2007 WHICH WAS DU/Y SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER NOTICE U/S. 143(2) ALONGWITH NOTICE U/S. 142(1) AND WAS ISSUED ON 01/8/2008 AND DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IN RESPONSE TO THE THESE NOTICE S, SHRI SUNII NAHATA, C.A. AND AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, ATTENDED ALONG WITH SHRI SHIVRATAN CHHAPARIA, ACCOUNTS EXECUTIVE FROM TIME TO TIME AND SUBMITTED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. AFTER DISCUSSION, TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ACCEPTED AS PER ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2012 & 3875/MUM/2012 M/S. SHIMNIT UTSCH INDIA PVT. LTD., 3 RETURN OF INCOME. THUS, TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ASSESSED AT RS.86,04,619/ - . HOWEVER, BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT WAS CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE THAT INTEREST INCOME IS INEXTRI CABLY LINKED WITH THE PROCESS OF SETTING UP OF THE NEW PROJECT THE SAID INTEREST OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN REDUCED FROM THE COST OF THE FIXED ASSETS OR PRE - OPERATIVE EXPENSES OF THE PROJECT. THE CIT(A) REJECTED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: - 4.1. I FIND THAT THE APPELLANT COMPANY HAS RAISED ONLY ONE GROUND OF APPEAL, WHICH TO CHARGING TO TAX A SUM OF RS. 1,38, 12,9337 - BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED DEPOSIT. THE APPELLANT CONTENDS THAT THE A.O. WAS WRONG AND CONTRARY TO THE FACTS IN TAXING TH E SAME. 4.2 BUT HOWEVER THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CLEARLY SUGGESTS THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. AND ASSESSED AS IT WAS DISCLOSED THROUGH ITS RETURN OF INCOME. I DO NOT FIND ANY DISCUSSION IN THE ENTIRE ORDER OF THE A.O. DAT ED 12/12/06 OF ANY SUCH ADDITION NOR EVEN THE APPELLANT COULD ADDUCE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SUCH CLAIM WAS AT ALL MADE BEFORE THE A.O. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE APPELLANT DOES NOT EMANATE FROM THE ORDER OF THE A.O. HENCE IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW THERE CANNOT BE ANY CAUSE OF GRIEVANCE TO THE APPELLANT TO BE AGITATED U/S 246A OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS COMPLETELY INFRUCTUOUS, AS THE SAME DOES NOT EMANATE FROM T HE ORDER OF THE A.O. HENCE THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 5. WE HAD CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF OFFERED THE INTEREST INCOME FOR TAX. NOTHING WAS SHOWN DURING COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO I NDICATE THAT THIS INCOME WAS NOT EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT AO HAS WRONGLY TAXED THE INCOME. SIMILAR IS THE FACTS IN THE A.Y.2008 - 09. FOLLOWING THE REASONING GIVEN HEREINABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORITIES FOR TAXING THE INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2012 & 3875/MUM/2012 M/S. SHIMNIT UTSCH INDIA PVT. LTD., 4 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 31 / 08 /201 8 SD/ - ( PAWAN SINGH ) SD/ - (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 31 / 08 /201 8 KARUNA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//