K. RAHEHA CORP P.LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5382/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7410 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & AMARJIT SINGH ( JM) I.T.A. NO. 5382/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) K. RAHEJA CORPORATION PVT. LTD. RAHEJA TOWER, PLOT NO. C-30 G BLOCK, OPP. SIDBI BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA EAST MUMBAI-400 051. PAN : AAACP0522B VS. DY.CIT, CC-4(2) ERSTWHILE DCIT CC-29 MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY MS. ARTI SATHE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI RAHUL RAMAN DATE OF HEARING 1 . 5 . 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1.5.2018 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) :- THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 28- 08-2015 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-52, MUMBAI AND IT RELAT ES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO U/S 14A OF THE ACT. 2. THE LD COUNSEL MS. ARTI SATHE APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS ARISEN OUT OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS INITIATED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. SHE SU BMITTED THAT THE AO HAD MADE AN IDENTICAL ADDITION IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS ALSO AND THE ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED THE SAME UPTO THE LEVEL OF THE TRIBUNAL. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL ARISING IN THE ORIGINAL A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAS SINCE BEEN DISPOSED OF BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH, VI DE ITS ORDER DATED 08-09- 2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.366/MUM/2013 PASSED FOR THE V ERY SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINING IT AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY SHE PRAYED THAT T HE ISSUE CONTESTED IN THE K. RAHEJA CORPORATION PVT. LTD. 2 PRESENT APPEAL, BEING THE SAME, MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO IN CONSONANCE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH. 3. THE LD CIT-DR, SHRI RAHUL RAMAN, DID NOT OBJEC T TO THE PLEA PUT FORTH BY LD A.R. 4. HAVING HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ISSUE RELATI NG TO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SINCE THE VERY SAME ISSUE IS URGED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THA T IT WOULD BE JUST AND PROPER TO RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO AS PER TH E DECISION TAKEN BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR EXAMINING THE SAME AFRESH AS PER THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE CO-O RDINATE BENCH IN ITS ORDER DATED 08-09-2016, REFERRED SUPRA. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1.5.20 18. SD/- SD/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 1/5/2018 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// ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY) PS ITAT, MUMBAI