USHDEV INTERNATIONAL LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6441/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 644119914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 21-06-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MODI
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Bad and doubtful debts

Judgement Text

M/S. USHDEV INTERNATIONAL LIMITED I.T.A. NO. 6441/M/2010 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 6441/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 M/S. USHDEV INTERNATIONAL LIMITED NEW HARILEELA HOUSE, 6 TH FLOOR, MINT ROAD, MUMBAI-400 001 PAN NO: AAACU 1672 R VS. DCIT 2(3) AAYKAR BHAVAN, TAPAL NO.555, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A. K. MODI DATE OF HEARING:. 21.06.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29-06-2012. O R D E R PER VIVEK VARMA, J.M. : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMERGES FROM THE O RDER OF CIT(A)-6, MUMBAI, DATED 27.07.2010, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1.THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION OF DISALLOWING BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF (REIMBURSABLE EXP ENSES FROM AHB) RS. 14,24, 880/-. THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED ON BE HALF OF AHB FOR PROCURING BUSINESS, TO BE REIMBURSED BY THE AHB. H OWEVER, DUE TO DISPUTE AHB HAD WITHHELD OUR COMMISSION AND EXPENSE S DUE FROM THEM. IT WAS FINALLY SETTLED BY AGREEING TO LUMP S UM AMOUNT AND THE BALANCE HAD BEEN RIGHTLY WRITTEN OFF AS NOT RECOVER ABLE. M/S. USHDEV INTERNATIONAL LIMITED I.T.A. NO. 6441/M/2010 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDIN GS UNDER SEC 271(1)(C) IS PREMATURE HENCE, DISMISSED OUR GROUND . 2. THE FACTS ARE THAT ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CLAIM OF BAD DEBTS WAS REJECTED BY THE A.O. AND THE ISSUE WENT UP TO THE H ON'BLE ITAT, WHEREIN, THE ITAT SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O, BE CAUSE THE A.O. HAD NO OCCASION TO GO THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PLA CED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A). IN THE SECOND ROUND ALSO, THE A SSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO SATISFY THE A.O. ON ITS CLAIM, AND, THE CIT(A), IN THIS ROUND OF PROCEEDINGS, REJECTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND IS NOW ONCE A GAIN BEFORE THE ITAT. 3. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE PLEADED ITS INABILITY TO NOT TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE, BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, WHICH HE INTENDED TO DO NOW. THE AR, PLACED BEFORE US A COPY OF EMAIL RECEIVED BY IT FROM ITS COUNTER PARTS IN MADRID, SPAIN, STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF THEIR DISP UTE. THE AR, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT IN VIEW OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, THE IS SUE MAY KINDLY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 4. THE DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY THE AR. 5. WE HAVE TO RECORD, THAT THIS LETTER WAS NEIT HER SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT NOR THROUGH ANY APPLICATION UNDER RULE 29 OF THE IN COME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PROCEDURE RULES, BUT SINCE, WE ARE REQUIRE D TO ASCERTAIN THE FACTS, AND RENDER JUSTICE TO EITHER PARTIES, WE, ONCE AGAI N RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO FORM AN INDEPENDENT OPINION ON THE DOCUMENT OF SETTLEMENT AS PLACED BEFORE US ALONG WITH ANY OTHER EVIDENCES, THAT THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO RELY UPON. M/S. USHDEV INTERNATIONAL LIMITED I.T.A. NO. 6441/M/2010 PAGE 3 OF 3 6. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTIONS. 7. THE APPEAL IS THUS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 29/06/2012. SD/- SD/- (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) (VIVEK VARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 29/06/2012. P/-*