IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.5309/M/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 2011 ) ACIT - 2(3), R.NO.552, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 / VS. M/S. WINDSOR REFRACTORIES PVT LTD., 407, SO LUCKY CORNER, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, CHAKALA, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI - 400 099. ./ PAN : AAACW1444P ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASGHAR ZAIN, VP , DR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUBHASH SHETTY / DATE OF HEARING : 16 .02.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 .02.2016 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 31.7.2013 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 6, MUMBAI DATED 3.5.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011. IN THIS APPEAL, REVENUE RAISED SOLITARY GROUND AND IT RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 54,73,085/ - U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BRIEFLY NARRATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE WHICH INCLUDE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME OF R S. 46,51,983/ - . AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSED INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 1,02,65,990/ - WHICH INCLUDES THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 54,73,085/ - MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAID DECISION OF THE AO, AS SESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 2 3. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, CIT (A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAID DECISION OF THE CIT (A), REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE AND SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE AY 200 9 - 2010 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE VIDE ITA NO.4966/M/2012 FOR THE AY 2009 - 2010, DATED 28.10.2015 . PARA 11 OF THE SAID TRIBUNALS ORDER IS RELEVANT IN THIS REGARD. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD DR FOR THE REVENUE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BO TH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE CITED DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE AY 2009 - 2010 (SUPRA). ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL WE FIND SIMILAR ISSUE WAS ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE PARA 11 OF ITS ORDER DATED 28.10.2015. CONSIDERING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SAID PARA AND FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS OF THIS ORDER, RELEVANT LINES ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER: - 11.......WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE FINDING AND DECISION OF THE LD CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE OF SITE EXPENSES AND THIS ISSUE IS SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE LD CIT (A) SHALL PROVIDE PROPER AND SPECIFIC REASONS FOR HIS DECISIONS. HENCE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PUR POSES. 7. CONSIDERING THE ADMITTED POSITION OF THE ISSUE AND PRAYER OF THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE REMAND THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH IDENTICAL DIRECTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH FEBRUARY, 2016. S D / - S D / - ( PAWAN SINGH ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUN TANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 16.2.2016 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS 3 / 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 . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI