WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 5(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7336/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2823 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/ SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & PAWAN SINGH (JM) I.T.A. NO. 7336 /MUM/ 20 1 4 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11 ) WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS PVT. LTD. NEELA HOUSE , 2 ND FLOOR M.L. DAHANUKAR MARG MUMBAI - 400 026. VS. ITO - 5(3)(4) AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO . AAACK5045J ASSESSEE BY MISS VASANTI PATEL DEPARTMENT BY SHRI MAURYA PRATAP DATE OF HEARING 11 . 7 . 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11 . 7 . 201 6 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN(AM) : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED THE ORDER DATED 23.9.2014 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) - 9, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2010 - 11. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE D ISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 14A OF THE ACT. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS HELD SHARES AS STOCK - IN - TRADE AND HAS ALSO MADE INVESTMENT S IN GROUP COMPANIES. FURTHER OWN FUNDS HELD BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE FAR IN EXCESS OF THE INVESTMENTS MADE. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAVE COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE U/S. 14A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THESE FACTUAL ASPECTS. SHE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO. 4822/MUM/2012 AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERING THE SAME AFRESH. WALCHAND KAMDHENUE COMMERCIALS P. LTD. 2 ACCORDINGLY, SHE PRAYED THAT THIS ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINING THE SAME AFRESH. 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PLEA PUT FORTH BY LEARNED AR. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERIN G THE SAME AFRESH , SINCE VARIOUS CONTENTIONS URGED BY THE ASSESSEE REQUIRE FRESH EXAMINATION. WE ALSO N OTICED THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2009 - 10. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE SAME AFRESH BY DULY CONSIDERING VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS THAT MAY BE PLACED BEFORE HIM BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11 .7.2016 SD/ - SD/ - (PAWAN SINGH ) (B.R.BASKARAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 11 / 7 / 20 1 6 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, / /TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI PS