DCI RG 4(2), MUMBAI V. SANJAY KUMAR H JHABAK, MUMBAI

ITA 8291/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1719 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI E BENCH MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RA O, JM ITA NO. 8291/MUM/2010 (ASST YEAR 2006-07) THE DYCOMMR OF INCOME TAX CIR 4(2), MUMBAI VS SANJAY KUMAR H JHABAK 1201 SRUSHI TOWER NEAR VIP CENTRE OLD PRABHADEVI ROAD, MUMBAI 400 025 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AACPJ4496M ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SH O P MEENA DT.OF HEARING 11 TH FEB 2013 DT OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15 TH FEB 2013 PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.9.2010 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2 THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS AS UNDER : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,18,156/- MA DE U/S 14RA R.W. R 8D OF THE I T ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD DR AND CONSIDERED THE RELEVA NT MATERIAL ON RECORD SINCE NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE; THEREFORE, WE PROPOSED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL EX-PARTE. 4 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS. 6,18,156/- U/S 14A BY APPLYING THE RULE 8D OF THE ITG ACT. ON APPEAL, THE COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH ITA NO. 8291/M/2010 . 2 COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ BOYCE MFG CO LTD VS DCI T REPORTED IN 328 ITR 81 ON THE GROUND THAT RULE 8D IS NOT APPLICABLE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5 NO DOUBT THAT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ BOYCE MFG CO LTD., RULE 8D IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS YEAR; HOWEVER, THE DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE ON SOME REASONA BLE BASIS. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE RECORD OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDI CTIONAL HIGH COURT (SUPRA) 6 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCEMENT IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 15 TH , DAY OF FEB 2013 SD/- SD/- ( RAJENDRA SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 15 TH FEB 2013 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR, ITAT, MUMBAI