ITA NOS.623 & 856/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD A BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR VICE PRESIDENT AND MAHAVIR PRA SAD JM] ITA NO.623/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 GUJARAT STATE PETRONET LIMITED, .. APPELLANT NORTH WING, PLOT NO.E-18, GIDC ELECTRONICS ESTATE, NR. K-7, CIRCLE, SECTOR 26, GANDHINAGAR 382 028. [PAN: AABCG 1812 E] VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR. .......... RESPONDENT ITA NO.856/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), GANDHINAGAR. .......... APPELLANT VS. GUJARAT STATE PETRONET LIMITED, RESPOND ENT 3 RD , BLOCK NO.15, UDHYOG BHAVAN, SECTOR-11, GANDHINAGAR 382 011. [PAN: AABCG 1812 E] APPEARANCES BY SANJAY R. SHAH FOR THE ASSESSEE V.K. SINGH FOR THE REVENUE DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 19.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.10.2018 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HA S CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 20 TH JANUARY 2016, PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A), IN TH E MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. ITA NOS.623 & 856/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING, LEA RNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE SHORT ISSUE REQUIRING OUR ADJUDICATION IN THIS CASE IS WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WITHOUT RECORDING AN Y DISSATISFACTION WITH THE SUO MOTU DISALLOWANCE OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 14A, INVOKED RULE 8D R.W.S. 14A, AND THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED, IN FAVO UR OF THE ASSESSEE, BY THE DECISION OF A CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR T HE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. A COPY OF THE SAID DECISION WAS P LACED ON RECORD. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT CON TROVERT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL BUT RELIES UPON THE STAND OF TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW NEVERTHELESS. 4. WE SEE NO REASONS TO TAKE ANY OTHER VIEW OF THE MATTER THAN THE VIEW SO TAKEN BY US IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. RESPECTFULLY F OLLOWING THE SAME, WE DELETE THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,58,31,847/- UNDER SEC TION 14A R.W.R. 8D. AS WE DO SO, WE HAVE TAKEN NOTE OF THE UNCONTROVERTED FACTUA L POSITION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT SHOWN ANY DISSATISFACTION WITH THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A R.W.R. 8D OFFERED SUO MOTU BY THE ASSESSEE. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE HAS NOT DISPUTED THIS FACTUAL ASPECT. IN VIEW OF T HESE DISCUSSIONS, THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A R.W.R. 8D, AS CHALLE NGED IN APPEAL BEFORE US, STANDS DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . 6. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ACCEP TS THAT IF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, ON THIS ISSUE I.E. 14A DISALLOWANCE, IS T O BE ALLOWED, THE GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE REVENUE WILL BE RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS. AS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE IS ALLOWED, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THIS ISSUE IS INDEED RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS. IT IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS AS SUCH . 7. TO SUM UP, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 17 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR PRASAD PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (VICE PRESIDENT) AHMEDABAD, DATED THE 17 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPOND ENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD