M/s. Truck Union, Bathinda V. The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax, Moga

ITA 613/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 61320914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K BANSAL; TARUN BANSAL S
• Keywords: Maximum Marginal Rate
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 613 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 PAN: AAAAT-6580-F M/S TRUCK UNION VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF BAGHAPURANA, BATHINDA INCOME TAX, CIRCL E MOGA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. S.K. BANSAL & SH. TARUN BANSAL, A DVOCATES RESPONDENT BY: SH. MAHAVIR SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 27.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.02.2014 ORDER PER BENCH 1. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINS T THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05.08.2013 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A)-II, LUDHIANA, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: I. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WRONGLY CONFIRMED THE REJEC TION OF APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE APPELLANT. II. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) IGNORED THE DECISION OF I.T .A.T., AMRITSAR IN A SIMILAR CASE THAT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATES IS NO T APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF GURU NANAK DEV TRUCK OPERATIVE UNION, B IKHI DATED 01.06.2007 FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05.[ NO APPEAL WAS FIL ED BEFORE THE HIGH COURT] III. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) IGNORED THE CIRCULAR OF THE BOARD BEARING NO. 320 DATED 11.01.1982. 2 I.T.A. NO. 613 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 IV. THAT LEARNED CIT(A) IGNORED THE ORDER OF HIS PREDEC ESSOR IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03, 2003-04 AND 2004-05 [FOR THREE YEARS] THAT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE IS NOT APPLICABLE. [NO APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT TO THE I.T.A.T.] V. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY ARE NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES; THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED TO REP EAT THE SAME. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAD DECIDED THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPO RTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE CIT-II, LUDH IANA, TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER THE LAW AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LEARNED DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY S ERIOUS OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ELEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 05.08.2013 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT-II, LUDHIANA AND WE ARE OF THE CONSI DERED VIEW THAT LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DECIDED THE I SSUES IN DISPUTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IN 3 I.T.A. NO. 613 (ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT TH E REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH GENUINE AND SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. ACCORD INGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF CIT-II, LUDHIA NA, TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER THE LAW AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 SD/./- SD/./- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 /RK/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: M/S TRUCK UNION BAGHAPURANA, BATHIND A 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE MOGA 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT, 5. THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.