THE ACIT 5(2), MUMBAI V. M/S. MCKECHNIE EXOTECH INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD 9 NOW KNOWN AS MGI COURTIER EXOTECH INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD(NOW KNOWN AS MGI COURTIER EXOTECH INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD), MUMBAI

ITA 698/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9289 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER AND SHRI V.D. RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER. I.T.A. NO. 69 8/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-2005. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF M/S MECKECHNIE EXOTECH INCOME TAX-5(2), MUMBAI. VS. INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS MGI COURTIER EXPOTECH INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.) 4, ALPANA, 60, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI 400026. PAN : AAACM6873A APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT B Y : SMT. APARNA AGARWAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA. O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-V, MUMBAI DATED 30-11-200 7 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFF ICER NOT TO INCLUDE MODVAT CREDIT IN THE CLOSING STOCK, IGNORIN G THE FACT THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. IN DO NIPPON CHEMICAL CO. LTD. 261 ITR 275 HAS NOT CONSIDERED TH E NEW PROVISION U/S 145A INSERTED BY FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 1998 WEF 1.4.999, WHICH IS APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD MRS. APARNA AGARWAL, THE LEARNED SR. A.R. ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND MR. VIJAY MEHTA, LEAR NED COUNSEL, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AS SUBMITTED BY BOTH THE PA RTIES, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION, AS ADJUSTMENTS OF EXCISE DUTY IS TO BE DONE TO THE OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES, SALES AS WELL AS TO THE CLOSING STOCK. THE AO SHALL APPLY THE DECISION OF T HE B-BENCH OF THE MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF FOREST ENGG. (INDIA) LTD. VS. ITO (2008) 26 SOT 178 (MUM.) AS WELL AS THE DECISION IN THE CA SE OF ACIT VS. TIME PACKAGING LTD. REPORTED IN (2008) 26 SOT 216 (MUM.) . 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 13 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (V.D. RAO) (J. SUDHAKARY REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MUMBAI, DATED : 13 TH JANUARY, 2010. WAKODE COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, I-BENCH (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES