OCTANT INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 4(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6230/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4312 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 31-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RADHA K NARANG

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN , AM AND AMARJIT SINGH , JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 6230 / MUM/ 20 1 3 ( / ASSESSMENT YEA R : 20 0 9 - 10 ) OCTANT INTER ACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S OCTANT INDUSTRIES LIMITED), FLOAT NO.2, SUDERSHAN BUILDING, ROAD NO.4, PERSTOMSAGAR, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI - 400089 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2)(4), MUMBAI . ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ ./PAN. : AACCK0438R / APPELLANT BY NONE / RESPONDENT BY MS. RADHA K NARANG / DATE OF HEARING : 3 1 .12 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 1. 1.2016 / O R D E R P ER B R BASKARAN, AM : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 26.8.2013 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - 8, MUMBAI WHEREIN THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.39,75,165/ - MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE FROM THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT BY RPAD ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE , WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 6230 / MUM/ 201 3 2 3. WE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE LD. DR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 3.4 OF THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) WHEREIN IT IS OBSERVED BY THE LD .CIT (A) THAT THE LD. AR OF THE APPELLANT HAD NO OBJECTION IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.39,75,165/ UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT ( VIDE ORDER SHEET NOTING DATED 23.8.2013 ) . ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AG REED TO THE ADDITION AND IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 4. WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD. DR . THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAMANLAL KAMDAR VS. CIT, 108 ITR 73 (MAD.) H AS HELD THAT THE APPEAL SHALL BECOME INCOMPETEN T IF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE SAID TO HAVE BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY . SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN EXPRESSED BY THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T V/S INDIAN EXPRESS (MADURAI) PVT. LIMITED REPORTED IN 140 ITR 705 (MAD). SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS AGREED TO THE ADDITION, NORMALLY IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THE SAID ISSUE. IT WAS NOT SHOWN TO US THA T THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ADDITION MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. . 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCO RDINGLY ON 1ST JAN,2016 . 1ST JAN, 2016 SD SD ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 1ST JAN , 2015 . . . ./ SRL , SR. PS ITA NO. 6230 / MUM/ 201 3 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI