M/s. SANJAY SALES CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. ADDL. CIT Rg. - 18(2), MUMBAI

ITA 750/MUM/2007

• Counselvise Citation: 75019914 RSA 2007
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 6 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Next Hearing Date: 01-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2007
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASAD BAPAT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH K BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 750 /MUM/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 M/M/S. SANJAY SALES CORPORATION, ALTA BHAVAN, 532, S.B. MARG, DADAR, MUMBAI 400028 VS. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE 18(2), R.NO.102, 1 ST FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LAL BAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI 400 012. PAN : AABPG 6064F (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY SHRI PRASAD BAPAT R E SPONDE NT BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 11/08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 /08/2015 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU, A.M: THE PRESENT APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AN D IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17/11/2006 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-18, MUMBAI PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04, WITH REF ERENCE TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27/03/2006, PASSED IN TERMS OF SECTION 143(3 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(THE ACT). 2. ORIGINALLY, THE CAPTIONED APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 23/09/2009. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON A MISCELLANEOU S APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 6/02/20 15 RECALLED THE EARLIER ORDER FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATING THE BELOW MENT IONED GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 I.T.A. NO. 750 /MUM/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 2 RAISED IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL, WHICH WAS INADVERTENT LY REMAINED TO BE ADJUDICATED:- 2.WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN BRINGING TO TAX DEPB INCOME AN AMOUNT O F RS.1,19,67,955/- AS AGAINST THAT OF RS.91,43,752/- CREDITED BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS ACCOUNTS. 3. IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN HEARD. THE PRIMARY ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CONTAINED I N GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1, WHICH RELATED TO THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 HHC OF THE ACT VIS--VIS THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF DEPB LICENCES. THE SAI D ISSUE WAS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER DATED 23/9/2009, WHEREBY THE MATTER WAS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS. 4. THE AFORESAID GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2, WHICH IS PR ESENTLY FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE US, RELATED TO THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF DE PB LICENCES, WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN TERMS OF THE AFORESAID, THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORI TIES ERRED IN BRINGING TO TAX AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,19,67,955/- ON ACCOUNT OF DEPB LICEN CE INCOME AS AGAINST A SUM OF RS.91,43,752/- CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE B OOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN SUPPORT OF ITS PLEA, THE APPELLANT REFERRED TO THE PAPER BOOK FILED, WHICH ENUMERATES THE DETAILS OF DEPB/DRFC CREDIT/ SALES AND POINTED OUT THAT OUT OF A SUM OF RS.1,19,67,955/- CONSIDERED BY THE INCOME-TAX AUTHO RITIES, CERTAIN AMOUNTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOK S OF ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING 31/3/2002, WHICH WAS LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE AFORESAID PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO A FAC TUAL APPRECIATION OF THE MATERIAL AND IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THAT THE SAME BE CONS IDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT THE MATTER BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR APPROPRIA TELY CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL I.T.A. NO. 750 /MUM/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 3 ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT WITH REGARD TO THE QUANTUM OF THE INCOME TO BE CONSIDERED ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF DEPB LICENCES IN T HE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED GROUND IS RESTORED BACK T O THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO SHALL CONSIDER THE SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIAL SOU GHT TO BE RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF ITS STAND AND, THEREAFTER, P ASS A SPEAKING ORDER AS PER LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEE PARTLY SUCCEEDS. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES ON 11/0 8/2015. SD/- SD/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (G.S. PANNU ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ,DATED [ VM. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 21, MUMBAI 4. CIT- 10, MUMBAI 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI A BENCH 6. GUARD FILE . BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI