JAYANT D. SANGHVI, MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 8(3), MUMBAI

ITA 7637/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 763719914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P SINGH; P K SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: S C TIWARI
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 7637/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 MR. JAYANT D. SANGHVI S-1, SANGHVI VILLA, 13 TH CROSS ROAD, JVPD SCHEME, MUMBAI-.400 049 PAN :AJXPS 7692 G VS. DC IT RANGE-8(3) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.C. TIWARI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K. SHUKLA & MR. O.P. SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.11.2013 O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-18, MUMBAI DATED 13.09.2010 FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE AC TION OF THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AGAINST THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DEDUCTION OF COMPENSATION OF RS.36,00,000/- FRO M THE ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE, AN IND IVIDUAL WHILE DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.24,68,070/- HAD OFFERED RS.73,00,000/- AS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. AGAINST THE SAID INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPER TY, THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED A DEDUCTION OF RS.36,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF COMPENSAT ION PAID TO M/S. SANGHVI SWISS REFILLS PVT.LTD (SSRPL). HOWEVER, IN THE ORIGINAL A SSESSMENT FRAMED, THE AO ACCEPTED THE RENT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THER BY ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION. THEREAFTER, THE LD.CIT HAD PASSED AN ORD ER U/S 263 ON 25.03.2008 ITA NO. 7637/MUM/2010 MR. JAYANT D. SANGHVI ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 2 SETTING ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS THE SAME WAS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. ON APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER, THE ASSESSEE WITHDREW THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND FURTHER THE MI SCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAD ALSO BEEN DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREBY CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT PASSED U/S 263 OF THE ACT. IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE A CTION OF THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) RE AD WITH SECTION 263 CONFIRMING THE SAID DISALLOWANCE. 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD, IT OBSERVED THAT WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 263, THE LD.CIT HA S DECIDED THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION OF COMPENSATION OF RS.36,00,000/- CLAIMED BY THE AS SESSEE ON MERITS ALSO BY DIRECTING THE AO FOR MAKING THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWAN CE. SINCE THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE L D.CIT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT HAS BECOME FINAL NOW. WHEN THE FACT BEING SO, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT RE- ADJUDICATION OF THE SAME ISSUE BY ENTERTAINING THE PRESENT APPEAL BECOMES REDUNDANT. IN VIEW OF THAT MATTER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 29 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 29.11.2013. *SRIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR I BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.