M/s. Shalimar Tanning Company, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 80/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68621 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N QUADIR HOSEYN
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 80/MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) M/S SHALIMAR TANNING COMPANY, 2 ND FLOOR, NO.5, NAVAL HOSPITAL RD., PERIAMET, CHENNAI - 600 003. PAN : AAAFS 1497 H (APPELLANT) V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUSINESS CIRCLE XII, CHENNAI - 600 034. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N. QUADIR HOSEYN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, ADDL. CI T DATE OF HEARING : 14.08.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.08.2013 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, ITS GRIEVAN CE IS THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF ` 88,05,763/- MADE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER, WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). I.T.A. NO. 80/MDS/12 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE COUNSELS. WE FIND THAT THE CI T(APPEALS) HAD DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A RE ASON THAT SECTION 40(A)(IA) COULD BE INVOKED ONLY FOR THE AMOUNTS WHI CH STOOD PAYABLE AT THE END OF THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR AND NOT ON PAID AMOUNTS. NO DOUBT, CIT(APPEALS) ALSO GAVE A FIND THAT THE PAYEE S AND RECIPIENTS HAD OFFERED THE AMOUNTS AS PART OF THEIR INCOME AND PAID TAX. THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD GROUND FOR THE ASSESSEE TO ESCAPE F ROM RIGOURS OF SECTIONS 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT, BUT NOT GOO D ENOUGH FOR EXCUSING APPLICATION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE AC T. 3. NEVERTHELESS, WHETHER SECTION 40(A)(IA) COULD BE APPLIED FOR AMOUNT PAYABLE AS AT THE END OF THE RELEVANT PREVIO US YEAR AND ALSO ON THE AMOUNTS PAID DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YE AR, IS A DEBATABLE ISSUE. OPINIONS OF VARIOUS HIGH COURTS ARE DIVERGE NT AND THERE IS NO DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT ON THIS ISSUE SO FAR. IN THE FITNESS OF THE THINGS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTE R HAS TO GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR CONSIDERATION AFRE SH. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) AND REMIT THE I SSUE REGARDING DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA), FOR ADJUDICAT ION AFRESH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. I.T.A. NO. 80/MDS/12 3 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON WEDNESDAY, THE 14 TH OF AUGUST, 2013, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 14 TH AUGUST, 2013. KRI. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A)-IV, CHENNAI-34 (4) CIT-IX, CHENNAI (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE