Dasmesh Mechanical Works, Malerkotla V. JCIT, Ludhiana

ITA 419/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8288 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Agreed addition

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 419/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 DASHMESH MECHANICAL WORKS, VS THE JCIT, RAIKOT, MALERKOTLA. RANGE IV, LUDHIANA. PAN: AAAFD8311M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ATUL GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 15.02.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.02.2017 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2 LUDHIANA DATED 20.02.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALES OF AGRICULT URAL IMPLEMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSES SEE HAD PAID INTEREST OF RS. 30,35,960/- TO THE PERSONS COVERED UNDER SECTION 40A(2)(B) OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THAT INTEREST TO AL L THESE PERSONS WERE PAID @ 24%. DETAILS OF PERSONS TO WHOM 2 INTEREST HAD BEEN PAID AND THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST P AID IS REPRODUCED ON PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT RATE OF INTE REST PAID WAS EXCESSIVE AS COMPARED TO MARKET RATE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPARED THE RATE OF INTEREST BEI NG PAID BY CERTAIN CASES IN MALERKOTLA, PLACE WHERE ASSESSEE IS ALSO RUNNING ITS BUSINESS AND NOTED THA T THE RATE OF INTEREST BEING PAID WAS 12%. THE DETAILS O F COMPARATIVE CASES HAVE BEEN REPRODUCED IN PARA 3.2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER POINTE D OUT THESE FACTS TO THE ASSESSEE AND ASKED AS TO WHY EXCESSIVE INTEREST MAY NOT BE DISALLOWED. THE ASSE SSEE AGREED TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS TO COVER THIS POINT AND ALSO TO COVER ANY POSSIBLE LEAKAGES UNDER OTHER HEADS OF EXPENSES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCORDING LY DISALLOWED RS. 10 LACS AND MADE THE ADDITION. 3. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) NOTED THAT IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN VARIOUS CASES, THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISALLOWED THE INTEREST IN EXCESS OF 15% AND FURTHE R THE ASSESSEE AGREED FOR THIS ADDITION, THEREFORE, NO AP PEAL LIES AGAINST AGREED ADDITION. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), ACCORDINGLY, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION AND DISMISSED T HIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE AGREED TO ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS BEFORE A SSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, HE HAS WITHDRAWN THE APPEAL. 3 ENDORSEMENT TO THAT EFFECT IS MADE IN THE APPEAL PA PERS ITSELF. 5. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, SINCE ASSESSEE AGREE D FOR ADDITION BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, THEREFOR E, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT BE MAINTAINABLE. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (BHAVNESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH FEBRUARY, 2017. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD