ACIT 14(3), MUMBAI V. MAHESH GUPTA (HUF), MUMBAI

ITA 5780/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 578019914 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: RACHANA KANOI
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 5780/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) A C I T - 14(3) SHRI MAHESH GUPTA (HUF) 6TH FLOOR, EARNEST HOUSE 18, SURTI CHAMBER, 2ND DHO BI NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400021 VS. TALAO MANE, MUMBAI 400002 PAN - AAEHM8728B APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR RESPONDENT BY: SMT. RACHANA KANOI DATE OF HEARING: 13.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 13.11.2013 O R D E R PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.06.2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-25, MUMBAI AND IT P ERTAINS TO A.Y. 2009-10. 2. THOUGH THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FIVE GROUNDS IN THE G ROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE SHORT ISSUE THAT ARISES OUT OF THESE GROUNDS IS WITH REGARD TO DEDUCTION ELIGIBLE UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT WITH REFEREN CE TO INTEREST RECEIVED FROM TRADE DEBTORS. 3. THE CASE OF THE AO IS THAT INTEREST INCOME CANNOT B E STATED TO HAVE BEEN DERIVED FROM INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS BUT ONLY ATTRI BUTABLE TO SUCH INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS AND HENCE, IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIO N OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA 183 TAXMAN 349, ASSESS EE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT ON SUCH INT EREST AMOUNT. AS CAN BE NOTICED FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED MAINLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE MATTER PERTAINING TO EARLIER YEARS IS PENDING BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND SUBJECT TO THE ORDER OF THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION THE CLAIM IN THIS YEAR IS NOT ALLOWABLE. IT MAY BE NOTICED THAT IDENTICAL DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2006-07 TO 2008-09. ITA NO. 5780/MUM/2012 SHRI MAHESH GUPTA (HUF) 2 4. ON AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THE FIRST APPELL ATE AUTHORITY FOLLOWED ITS OWN DECISION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 TO 2008-09 AND OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUC TION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED FROM TRA DE DEBTORS. AGGRIEVED, REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLACED BEFORE US A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT B BENCH , MUMBAI DATED 04.01.2013 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER YEARS (ITA NO. 2495/MUM/ 2011, ITA NO. 2496/MUM/2011 & ITA NO. 7102/MUM/2011 FOR A.Y. 2006- 07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 RESPECTIVELY) TO SUBMIT THAT THIS ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT INTERES T ON DELAYED PAYMENTS OF SALE PRICE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT. 6. THE LEARNED D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE ISSUE STA NDS COVERED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER. 7. SINCE THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS IN CO NSONANCE WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIE R YEARS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE SAID ORDER. THEREFORE WE DISMISS T HE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH NOVEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DATED: 13 TH NOVEMBER, 2013 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 25, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT 14, MUMBAI CITY 5. THE DR, B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.