POLYNOVA INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 10(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7802/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8402 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: SAMEER SALVA WITHDRAW LETTER
• Keywords: Depreciation; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 234B; 115JB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH C, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTAT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 7802/M/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 M/S. POLYNOVA INDUSTRIES LTD., 159, CST ROAD, KALINA, MUMBAI 400 098. PAN:AAACP3071F VS. DCIT, RANGE-10(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI 400 020. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAMEER SALVA (WITHDRAW LETTER) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI OM PRAKASH MEENA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 6.11.2012 DATE OF ORDER: 9.11.2012 O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 12.11.2010 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A)-21, MUMBAI DATED 20.07.2010 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR2007-2008. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF ARTIFICIAL LEATHER AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING NIL INCOME AFTER SET OFF OF UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS 1,00,87,000/-. IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENTS, AO LEVIED INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT ON THE BOOK PROFITS DETERMINED U/S 115JB OF THE ACT. A GGRIEVED WITH THE DECISION OF THE AO, ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPEL LATE AUTHORITY AND THE CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE SAME. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAME, THE AS SESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEALS WITH THE GROUNDS RAISED CONTESTING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. ASSESSEE CONTESTED THAT THE SAID PROVISION S ARE INAPPLICABLE TO THE BOOK PROFITS COMPUTED U/S 115JB OF THE ACT. 3. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FILED A LET TER STATING THAT THE GROUNDS ARE NOT PRESSED AND SOUGHT PERMISSION OF THE BENCH ORAL LY TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. ON 2 THE OTHER HAND, LD DR EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION FOR TH E SAID WITHDRAWAL OF THE GROUNDS AS THE ASSESSEES REQUEST IS ULTIMATELY IN CONFORMI TY WITH THE STAND OF THE REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE CONTEN TS OF THE LETTER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE CONCURRENCE OF THE PARTIE S AND ALSO THE FACT THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS WITH THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C IN RESPECT OF PROFITS COMPUTED UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT, WH ICH WAS DECIDED BY THE CIT (A) AGAINST THE ASSESSEE CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HO NBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VRINDAVAN BEVERAGES LTD. (186 TAXMA N 233/288 CTR (KAR) 1) AND THE SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT PRESSING ON THE GROUNDS RAISED, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED . 5. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- (VIVEK VARMA) (D. K ARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 9 .11.2012 AT :MUMBAI OKK COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (A), CONCERNED. 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR C, BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI