THE ACIT RG 18(2), MUMBAI V. M/S. SANJAY SALES CORPORATION, MUMBAI

ITA 59/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1294 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L K AGRAWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: L N JOY
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'J' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 59/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1999-2000) ACIT, RANGE-18(2) M/S. SANJAY SALES CORPORATION ROOM NO. 115, 1ST FLOOR ALTA BHAVAN, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL VS. DADAR, MUMBAI 400028 MUMBAI 400012 PAN - AAMFS 3154 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI L.K. AGRAWAL RESPONDENT BY: SHRI L.N. JOY O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XVIII, MUMBAI DATED 09.10.2007. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - I) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN: (I) THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. (II) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE DEDUCTION U/S . 80HHC COMPUTED AFTER CONSIDERING INDIRECT COST OF RS.1,24 ,66,993/- WHICH HAS BEEN ARRIVED AT AFTER REDUCING 10% OF IND IRECT COST ATTRIBUTABLE TO DDB & DEPB INSTEAD OF INDIRECT COST OF RS.1,39,99,356/-. (III) THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT T HAT THE HON'BLE ITATS DECISION IN THE CASE OF M/S. SURENDR A ENGG. CORPORATION 86 ITD 121 (MUM) HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. (IV) FOR THESE AND OTHER REASONS THEY MAY BE URGED AT TH E TIME OF HEARING IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A ) MAY BE SET- ASIDE ON THE ABOVE ISSUE AND THAT OF THE AO RESTORE D. ITA NO. 59/MUM/2008 M/S. SANJAY SALES CORPORATION 2 3. AT THE OUTSET IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE FOR A.Y. 1992-93 THE ITAT HAS REJECTED THE DEPARTMENTAL GROU NDS ON SIMILAR MANNER IN ITA NO. 1392/MUM/2003 DATED 21.02.2006 FOLLOWING THE SPECIAL BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF SURENDRA ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION VS. ACIT 86 ITD 121. SUBSEQUENTLY THE PRINCIPLE IS ALSO CONFIRMED I N THE CASE OF HERO CYCLES LTD. 295 ITR 455 BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. THE CIT(A) DECIDED THE ISSUE IN THIS YEAR FOLLOWING THE ITAT DECISION IN T HE CASE OF SURENDRA ENGINEERING CORPORATION (SUPRA) ON THE ISSUE OF COM PUTATION OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC IN RESPECT OF INDIRECT COST ATT RIBUTABLE TO EXPORT INCENTIVES. SINCE THE CIT(A)S ORDER IS IN LINE WIT H THE PRINCIPLE ESTABLISHED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE ABOVE REFERRED DECISION, THERE IS NO NEED TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY REVENUES GROUNDS ARE REJECTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE 2010. SD/- SD/- (N.V. VASUDEVAN) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 25 TH JUNE 2010 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) XVIII, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT XVIII, MUMBAI CITY 5. THE DR, J BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.