ITO 19(2)(3), MUMBAI V. LUXURY FIANNCE INVESTMENT CO., MUMBAI

ITA 6047/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3519 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 10 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A RAMACHANDRAN
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM) AND SHRI JASON P. B OAZ (AM) ITA NO. 6047/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1997-98 THE ITO - 19(2)(3) , ROOM NO. 311, 3 RD FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI- 400012. VS. M/S. LUXURY FINANCE INVESTMENT CO., 159, C.S.T. ROAD, KALINA, SANTACRUZ(E), MUMBAI- 400 098. PAN : AAAFL2013N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. A. RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT BY : MS. VASANTI PATEL DATE OF HEARING: 04/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 04/07/2016 O R D E R PER JASON P. BOAZ, AM THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REV ENUE AGAINST IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20/05/2010 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-30, MUM BAI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 143(3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 1997-98, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1) ' ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS . 23,37,550/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISCOUNT CHARGES MADE BY A.O. 2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESS EE FIRM HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE DISCOUNTING CHARGES HAV E BEEN PAID 2 ITA NO. 6047/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1997-98 WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSIN ESS OF THE ASSESSEE. 3) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESS EE WAS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE COPIES OF BILLS OF DISCO UNTING/FINANCE CHARGES WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED AT THE TIME OF ORIG INAL ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS AT THE TIME OF FRESH ASSESSMENT. 4) THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED . 5) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ANY GROUND OR ADD A NEW GROUND WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTICED THAT, THE DISPUTE D ISSUE IS ONLY FOR RS. 23,37,550/- AND THE TAX EFFECT ON THIS AMOUNT IS BE LOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 10 LAKHS. AS PER THE LATEST CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 2 1 OF 2015, DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, NEW GUIDELINES OF MONETARY LIMIT FO R FILING OF APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED, WHEREBY THE TAX EFFECT FOR FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED AT RS. 10 LAKHS. IN TH E SAID CIRCULAR, IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTION WI LL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY T HE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4 TH JULY, 2016 SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (JASON P.BOAZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 04/07/2016 3 ITA NO. 6047/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1997-98 / 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// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) PRAMILA , / ITAT, MUMBAI