D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 3(3), MUMBAI V. WELLKNOWN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 5983/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2171 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 21-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJIV DUTT
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Earning of tax free income; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5983/M/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(3), ROOM NO.609, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 VS. M/S. WELLKNOWN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., 14 TH FLOOR, B-WING, 241/242, NIRMAL, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021 PAN: AAECM 3469J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAKESH JOSHI, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI SANJIV DUTT, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.12.2015 O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-7, MUMBAI DATED 29.05.2012 PERTAINING TO A.Y . 2009-10. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER: '1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE ID. CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF I NTEREST EXPENDITURE OF RS.55,32,215/- CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD 'INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY' WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE ITS ELF CONTENDED THAT THE LOANS WERE UTILIZED FOR REPAYMENT OF EARLIER LOANS FROM SISTER CONCERN AND THE SAID INTEREST WAS NOT COVERED U/S.24(B) OF THE ACT. 2 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,68,255/- U/S.14A OF THE IT ACT, 1961, R.W. RULE 8D OF THE IT RULES, 1962, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MUMBAI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. GODREJ & BOYC E MFG. CO. LTD., THE ACTUAL EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME IS NOT NECESSAR Y FOR DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE U/S. 14A OF THE ACT, RELATABLE TO TH E INVESTMENT CAPABLE OF GENERATING EXEMPT INCOME. 3 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.6,45,00,000/- U/S.68 OF THE ACT, BEING UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS, WITHOUT APPRECIATING ITA NO.5983/M/2012 M/S. WELLKNOWN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. 2 THE FACT THAT THE IDENTITY AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE CLAIMED INVESTORS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION BEING SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS NOT ESTABLISHED AND THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRO DUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A) DESERVED TO BE REJECTED U/R. 46A OF THE I. T . RULES, 1962, SINCE REMAND REPORT OF THE A.O. ON THE SAID ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE WAS NOT CALLED FOR BY THE CIT(A).' 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE APPEAL UNDER CONSIDERA TION HAVE ELABORATELY BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE OFFICER IN THE ORDER DATED 01.04.1 5 MADE UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT READ WITH SECTION 153A. IT IS THE SAY O F THE LD. COUNSEL THAT SINCE THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE IN THE ORDER MADE UNDER SECTION 153A, THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DESERVE S TO BE UPHELD. 3. THE LD. D.R. FAIRLY CONCEDED TO THIS AND STATED THAT ISSUES RAISED VIDE GROUND NOS.1 & 3 OF THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE COVERED BY THE SUBSEQUENT ORDER MADE UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT AND IN SO FAR AS ISSUES RAISED VIDE GROUND NO.2 ARE CONCERNED IN THE SUBSEQUENT ORDER, THE SAM E ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN ENHANCED. THE LD. D.R. FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A) NEEDS NO INTERFERENCE. 4. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT OR DER DATED 01.04.15 MADE UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CLAIM OF THE LD. COUNSEL. THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE REFORE, THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE PRESENT APPEAL NEEDS NO INTERFERE NCE. 5. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.12.2015. SD/- SD/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (N.K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 22.12.2015. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. ITA NO.5983/M/2012 M/S. WELLKNOWN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.