ACIT, CHENNAI V. A.V.Ravikumar, CHENNAI

ITA 465/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 81117 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 30-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: V S JAYAKUMAR
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , !' # $# #'% , & !' ' BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 465/MDS/2014 & ( #)( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE IV, CHENNAI - 600 034. V. SHRI A.V. RAVIKUMAR, 128/3, 6 TH STREET, I SECTOR, K.K. NAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 078. PAN : AAJPR 6692 J (%+/ APPELLANT) (-.%+/ RESPONDENT) %+ / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. DAS GUPTA, JCIT -.%+ / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.S. JAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE 1 # / 2 / DATE OF HEARING : 30 TH JULY, 2014 3) / 2 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 TH AUGUST, 2014 / O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE ASSAILI NG THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V I, CHENNAI, DATED 30.09.2013, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE: THE ASSESSEE IS PROVIDI NG CONSULTANCY SERVICES TO A LOGISTICS COMPANY M/S FLYJAC LOGISTIC S PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE IS PROVIDING ADVISORY SERVICES IN LOGISTIC S FIELD, VIZ. 2 I.T.A. NO. 465/MDS/14 IDENTIFICATION OF NEW AREAS, OPPORTUNITIES, TIE-UP WITH FOREIGN AGENTS AND TRANSPORT PROVIDERS. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RE TURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON 29.09.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME ` 3,19,84,680/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECT ED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) WAS ISSUED TO THE A SSESSEE ON 29.08.2011. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE DISALLOWANCE INTER ALIA ON ACCOUNT OF CERTAIN INDIRECT EXPENDITURE AND SALARY/WAGES PAID BY THE A SSESSEE TO HIS STAFF. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 06.02.201 3, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS ). THE CIT(APPEALS), VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER, HELD THAT THE OF FICE EXPENDITURE AND EXPENDITURE ON WAGES AND SALARIES RELATE TO THE EARNING OF INCOME, I.E. CONSULTANCY SERVICES AND ALLOWED THE S AME. 3. NOW, THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL ASSAILING THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(APPEALS). SHRI S . DAS GUPTA, JCIT, APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE, SUBMITTED THAT THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN COMING TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE EXPENDITURE OF ` 22,00,393/- HAS BEEN INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN R ELATION TO EARNING OF INCOME FROM CONSULTANCY SERVICES. 3 I.T.A. NO. 465/MDS/14 4. SHRI V.S. JAYAKUMAR, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAD COME UP BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. T HE REVENUE HAD FILED AN APPEAL IN I.T.A. NO. 956/MDS/2010, WHI CH WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 03.01.2011. THE LD. COUNSEL PLACED ON RECORD A COPY OF THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIB UNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALSO EXAMINED THE DECIS ION OF CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 956/MD S/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED INDIRECT EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF ` 8,04,393/- TOWARDS PROMOTIONAL EXPENSES, CONSULTANCY CHARGES, COMMISSI ON, CAR HIRE, DEPRECIATION, PRINTING, TRAVELLING, CONVEYANCE, ETC . AND ` 13,96,000/- TOWARDS SALARY AND WAGES TO THE STAFF. WE FIND THA T SIMILAR ISSUE HAD COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNA L, VIDE ORDER DATED 03.01.2011 CONFIRMING FINDINGS OF THE CIT(APP EALS), HELD THAT THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IS TOWARDS THE EARNING OF INCOME FROM CONSULTANCY SERVICES. THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT BEEN AB LE TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IN THE IMPUG NED ORDER. 4 I.T.A. NO. 465/MDS/14 6. WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO DIFFER WITH THE EAR LIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) IS CONFIR MED AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED BEING DEVOID OF MERITS. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 18 TH OF AUGUST, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( $# #'% ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (VIKAS AWASTHY) !' /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & !' /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, D! /DATED, THE 18 TH AUGUST, 2014. KRI. !E / -&2F$ G$)2 /COPY TO: 1. %+ /APPELLANT 2. -.%+ /RESPONDENT 3. 1 H2 () /CIT(A)-VI, CHENNAI-34 4. 1 H2 /CIT-X, CHENNAI-34 5. $#IJ -&2& /DR 6. J( K /GF.