TEKSONS P.LTD, THANE V. ASST CIT 5(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4176/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0248 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V VIDHYADHAR
• Assessee Lawyers: P V DESAI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4176/MUM./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 ) M/S. TEKSONS PVT. LTD., KOLSHET ROAD P.B. NO.20, KAPURBAWDI THANE 400 061 PAN NO. AABCT0522A . APPELLANT V/S ASST. CIT 5(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. P.V. DESAI REVENUE BY : SHRI. V. VIDHYADHAR DATE OF HEARING 10/08/2017 DATE OF ORDER - 18 .0 8 .2017 O R D E R PER: SHAMIM YAHYA T HIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF LEARNED CIT - A DATED 16/03/2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12. 2. T HE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER : - 1.1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWING THE SUM OF RS.2,91,000/ - U/S.14A OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 1.2. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST FREE FUNDS FOR INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL F UND AND THE INTEREST EARNED BY THE APPELLANT WAS MORE THAN THE INTEREST PAID BY THE APPELLANT AND HENCE NO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID BY THE APPELLANT IS JUSTIFIABLE. ITA NO. 4176/MUM/2016 M/S. TEKSONS PVT. LTD., 2 1.3. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT INCURRED ANY EXPEN DITURE FOR EARNING DIVIDEND INCOME ON MUTUAL FUND AND HENCE THE ENTIRE DISALLOWANCE U/S.14A IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. 1.4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ENTIRE DISALLOWANCE U/S.14 R.W.R. 8D BE DELETED OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE THE SAME BE CALCULATED CORRECTLY AS PER LAW. 3. A T THE OUTSET IN THIS CASE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE SHALL BE WITHDRAWING THE APPEAL. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID N O T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THIS PROPOSITION. 4. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE HAVE GRANTED PERMISS ION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 8 .08 .2017 S D / - S D / - SANDEEP GOSAIN SHAMIM YAHYA JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 1 8 .08 .2017 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER KARUNA SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI