ACIT, Jaipur V. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD., Jaipur

ITA 61/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99404 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: P C PARWAL CA DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KN O] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YA DAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 61/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 THE ACIT CIRCLE- 6 JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD. , SETU BHAWAN, JHALANA DOONGRI, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AABCR 9650 F VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL , CA LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21/10/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26/10/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM:- THE REVENUE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR DATED 11-11-2013 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2010-11 WHEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE R EVENUE. (I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING CONTRIBUTION OF RS. 10,00,000/- TO STATE RENEWAL FUND AS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE. (II) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AS ALLOWABLE EXPENSES. ITA NO. 61/JP/2014 ACIT ,CIRCLE-6,JAIPUR VS. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEV ELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD. . 2 2.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 2.2 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT REVENUES GROUND NO. 1 IN RESPECT OF CONTRIBUTION TO STATE RENEWAL FUND IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ITAT ORDERS IN ITA NO. 919/JP/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 DATED 16-07-2010 AND ITA N O. 754/JP/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 DATED 26-02-2010. THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-0 7 VIDE PARA 4 AND 5 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 4. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE A CONTR IBUTION TO STATE RENEWAL FUND FOR RS. 10 LACS. THE AO DISAL LOWED THE SAME BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE RAJ ASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JODHPUR COOPERATI VE MARKETING SOCIETY, 275 ITR 372 (RAJ.). THE CIT(A) BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH IN CASE OF RAJ ASTHAN STATE SEED CORPORATION LTD. DELETED THE DISALLOWANC E MADE BY THE AO. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIE S. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS SQUARELY COVERE4D BY THE DECISION OF ITAT IN CASE OF RAJASTHAN STATE SEED CORPORATION LTD. VS. ACIT IN ITA NO. 233/JP/2009 DA TED 25- 05-2009 WHICH IS BASED UPON HON'BLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT ITA NO. 61/JP/2014 ACIT ,CIRCLE-6,JAIPUR VS. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEV ELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD. . 3 JUDGEMENTS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SHRI RAJASTHAN SY NTEX LTD. 221 CTR 410 (RAJ.) AND CIT VS. RAJASTHAN SPINNING A ND WEAVING MILLS LTD. 274 ITR 465 (RAJ.). THE FACTS OF HON'BLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN CASE OF JODHPUR COOPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY WHICH IS RELIED BY TH E AO IS DISTINGUISHABLE AS IN THAT CASE THE AMOUNT WAS PROV IDED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE EMPLOYEES. SINCE, IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO THE AMOUNT WAS SET APART NOT FOR SHAREHOLDER BUT IT WAS PROVIDED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE EMPLOYEES, BY FOLLO WING OUR EARLIER DECISIONS, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. C IT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. THIS GROUND OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMIS SED. 2.3 APROPOS GROUND NO. 2, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THOUGH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THIS GROUND YET T HE REVENUES GROUND IS NOT CORRECT INASMUCH AS THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION W AS NOT THE PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES. ON THE CONTRARY, IT IS INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE OUT OF SURPLUS FROM PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES ACCOUNT. THEREFO RE, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING ITAT OR DERS (SUPRA) IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE 2005-06 AND 2006-07, TH E GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 61/JP/2014 ACIT ,CIRCLE-6,JAIPUR VS. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEV ELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD. . 4 2.5 APROPOS GROUND NO. 2, WE FIND MERIT IN THE ARGU MENTS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT IN QUESTIO N ACTUALLY IS NOT A DISALLOWANCE OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES BUT THE SAME WAS INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TAXATION. THEREFORE, GROUND NO. 2 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 /10/20 15. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 26 /10/ 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELOPM ENT & CONSTRUCTION LTD. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A) 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.61/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR