UNILEVER INDIA EXPORT LIMITED (FORMERLY INDEXPORT LIMITED), MUMBAI V. D.C.I.T.-OSD-1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5783/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 578319914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL F , BENCH , MUMBAI , BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA , J M & SHRI R.S.SYAL , A M TA NO. 5783 / M UM / 20 1 1 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 0 - 0 1 ) UNILEVER INDIA EXPORT LIMITED (FORMERLY INDEXPORT LIMITED), 165/166, BACKBAY RECLAMATION MUMBAI - 400 020 VS. DCIT, OSD 1(1), MUMBAI . PAN/GIR NO. : A FBPM 6025 M ( APP ELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : MR. NISHANT THAKKAR /REVENUE BY : MR. ANURAG SHRIVASTAVA DATE OF HEARING : 8 TH AUGUST , 201 3 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 ST AUGUST , 2013 O R D E R P ER SHRI R.K.G UPTA, JM : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) , MUMBAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 0 - 01 . 2 . THE ASSESSEE IS OBJECTING IN NOT ALLOWING THE VA RIOUS EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERING AND NOT ALLOWING THE DEPRECIATION ON RELOCATION OF THE MACHINERY IN CASE OF ONE UNIT AS THE ASSESSEE HAS TWO UNITS. 3 . IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT ONE UNIT WAS CLOSED DURIN G THE YEAR 1995 - 1996, HOWEVER ALL EXPENSES CLAIMED AFTER 1995 - 96 TILL THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999 - 2000 HAVE BEEN ALLOWED BY THE AO HIMSELF. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THERE WERE SALES OF STOCK IN HAND LYING WITH THE ASS ESSEE. THEREFORE, VARIOUS I TA NO. 5783 /1 1 2 EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF SALARIES, RENT, ELECTRICITY EXPENSES ETC. ARE ALLOWABLE AS PER PROVISION OF LAW. 4 . IN RESPECT TO RELOCATION EXPENSES, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HIMSELF ALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION ON THE MACHINERY, HOWEVER ON RELOCATION THE CHARGES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WERE CAPITAL IN NATURE, THE DEPRECIATION IS ALLOWABLE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE MACHINERY RELOCATED TO OTHER PLACE, HAS BEEN USED FOR BUSINESS. 5 . ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH THAT ALL THESE FACTS R EQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED, THEN THE LEARNED AR FAIRLY STATED THAT THE MATTER CAN BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION THAT IF THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND CORRECT, THEN VARIOUS EXPENSES CLAIMED AND DEPRECIATION ON RELOCATION OF TH E MACHINES , SHOULD BE ALLOWED. 6 . LEARNED DR DID NOT OBJECT THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED AR. 7 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE SET ASIDE ALL THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO WILL FIND OUT AS TO WHETHER IN EARLIER YEAR SIMILAR EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ALLOWED AND IF FOUND THAT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ALLOWED, THEN OF COURSE THE SIMILAR E XPENSES CLAIMED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE ALSO TO BE ALLOWED. THE AO WILL ALSO ASCERTAIN THE FACTUAL ASPECT AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CERTAIN SALES AND IF THE SALES ARE ALLOWED OUT OF EARLIER STOCKS, THEN EXPENSES MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SALARY, ELECTRICITY EXPENSES ETC., SHOULD BE ALLOWED . I TA NO. 5783 /1 1 3 8 . SIMILARLY, IN RESPECT TO RELOCATION CHARGES AS CLAIMED CAPITAL IN NATURE BY THE ASSESSEE, THE DEPRECIATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS TO WHETHER THE SAME IS ALLOWABLE OR NOT , BECAUSE THE AO HIMSELF HA S ALLOWED DEPRECIATION ON MACHINERY , MEANING THEREBY THE MACHINERY HAS BEEN PUT TO USE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUE IN RESPECT OF DEPRECIATION ON RELOCATION CHARGES MAY ALSO BE CONSIDERED AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 9 . RESULTANTLY , APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST D AY OF A U G . 201 3 . SD/ - ( ) ( R.S.SYAL ) SD/ - ( ) ( R.K.GUPTA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 21/08 / 2013 /PKM , PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE C I T(A) , MUMBAI . 4. / C I T 5. / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI . 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, ( /ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI