ANB SOLUTIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI V. PR CIT 9, MUMBAI

ITA 3945/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8869 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R P MEENA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A , MUMBAI BEFORE S HRI G.S. PANNU (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) ITA NO. 3945/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ANB SOLUTIONS. (P) LTD., 901 KAMLA EXECUTIVE PARK, OPPOSITE VAZIR GLASS FACTORY OFF AND HERI KURL RD, JG NAGAR, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI PIN 400059 PAN : AAHCA9088Q VS. THE PR. CIT 9, R. NO. 214, AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI R.P. MEENA (CIT DR) DATE OF HEARING: 23/10 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23 / 10 /201 7 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER DATED 29/03/2017 PASSED BY THE LD. PR. COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 9 , MUMBAI , UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE A CT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE PR. COMMISSIONER BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROU ND OF APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER DATED MARCH 29, 2017, PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 9, (PCIT), MUMBAI UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT) IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 2 ITA NO. 3945 / MU M/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) IS NEITHER ERRONEOUS NOR PREJUDICED TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. 2. BASED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED PCIT HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING T HE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) TO EXAMINE THE EXPENDITURE OF INR 4,80,66,746/ - INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT ON SALARY AND BONUS PAID TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AO HAD CALLED FOR ALL THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THIS EXPENDITU RE AND HAD APPLIED HIS MIND. 3. THE LEARNED PCIT HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE AO IGNORING THE SETTLED LEGAL POSITION THAT AN ASSESSMENT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE MERELY BECAUSE IT IS FELT THAT SOME MORE ENQUIRIES AND VERIFICATION COULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE AO. EACH OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE INDEPENDENT AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE OTHER GROUNDS PREFERRED BY THE APPELLANT. 3 . AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE PRESENT APPEAL, HENCE THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THE SAME. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE APPLICATION DATED 09.10.2017 FILED BY THE AS SESSEE. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4 . IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ALLOW THE A PPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEAL AS WITHDRAWN. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 20 07 IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN . 3 ITA NO. 3945 / MU M/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD OCTOBER , 2017 . SD/ - SD/ - ( G.S. PANNU ) ( RAM LAL NEGI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED: 23 / 10 / 2017 ALINDRA, PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI