ACIT 1(1), MUMBAI V. FRIGERIO CONSERVA ALLANA LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6870/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8970 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MANJUNATH KARHIHALLI
• Section: 14A; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH F BENCH BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.6870/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ACIT 1(1) R.NO. 579, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020 VS. M/S. FRIGERIO CONSERVA ALLANA LTD. ALLAN HOUSE, J.A. ALLANA MARG, COLABA, MUMBAI 400 001 PAN NO. AAACF 0522 B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : DR. MANJUNATH KARHIHALLI RESPONDENT BY : MR. JITENDRA JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 10.09.20 12 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.09.2012 ORDER PER B.RAMAKOTAIAH, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A)-1 MUMBAI DATED 13.07.2011. THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL I S WITH REFERENCE TO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A. 2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 9,27,652/- U/S 14A R/W RULE 8D(2) ON NOTICING THAT ASSESSEE HA S SHOWN INVESTMENTS OF RS.18,54,18,155/- IN THE BALANCE SHE ET WHICH EARNS DIVIDEND INCOME. ITA NO.6870/MUM/2011 M/S. FRIGERIO CONSERVA ALLANA LTD. 2 2.1 THE LD.CIT(A) FOLLOWING DECISION OF THE I.T.A.T ., CHENNAI IN THE CASE OF M/S. SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDING LTD. IN IT A NO. 2148/MDS/2010 DATED 20.05.2011 DELETED THE DISALLOW ANCES ON THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY DIVIDEND INCOME, WHICH IS EXEMPT. REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROU NDS. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) IS CORRECT IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.9,27,652/- U/S. 14A RELYING ON THE DECISION OF I TAT, CHENNAI IN THE CASE OF M/S. SIVA INDUSTRIES & HOLDI NGS LTD. REPORTED IN ITA NO. 2148/MDS/2010 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH OF ITAT, D ELHI IN THE CASE OF CHEMINVEST LTD. REPORTED IN ITA NO. 87/DEL/2008 AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT R ULE 8D IS MANDATORY W.E.F. AY 2008-09. 3 AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) DID NOT CONSIDER THE DETAILED SUBMIS SION MADE BEFORE HIM AND THE ISSUE WAS NOT DECIDED ON MERITS; WHE REAS THE LD.DR REFERRED THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH TO SUPPO RT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE O F THE OPINION THAT THE ISSUE REQUIRES RE-EXAMINATION BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND LAW ON THE IS SUE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO SUBMIT THE NECESSARY DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF ASSESS ING OFFICER. ITA NO.6870/MUM/2011 M/S. FRIGERIO CONSERVA ALLANA LTD. 3 5 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST SEPTEMBER, 2012 SD/- (SHRI I.P. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 21 ST SEPTEMBER, 2012 RASIKA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, MUMBAI 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH F MUMB AI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI