VALENTINE PROPERTIES P. LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 838/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4630 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: REEPAL TRAISHAWALA
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.V. EASWAR, HONBLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 838/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08. VALENTINE PROPERTIES LTD., DY. COMMISSIONER OF 302 SYLVERTON BUILDING, VS. INCOME-TAX. 102 WODE HOUSE ROAD, CIRCLE-38, MUMBAI. COLABA, MUMBAI-400005. PAN AAACV 1778R (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI REEPAL TRAISHAWALA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI CHANDRAJITSINGH. O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-41, MUMBAI DATED 08-01-2010. 2. THE SOLE ISSUE THAT ARISES IN THIS APPEAL, IS T HE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, BY INVOKING RULE 8D FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 3. BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE NOW S TANDS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF GODREJ BOYCE MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. VS. DCIT, INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 626 OF 2010, JUDGMENT DATED 12 TH AUGUST, 2010 AND THAT RULE 8D CANNOT BE APPLIED FO R THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, AND THAT A REASONABLE AMOU NT SHOULD BE DETERMINED FOR BEING DISALLOWED U/S 14A. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSION, WE RESPECTFULL Y FOLLOW THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GOD REJ BOYCE MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. AND SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DETERMINING THE DISALLOWANCE, IN THE MANNER LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. THUS GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. COMING TO GROUND NO. 4, THE SAME CHALLENGES THE INITIATION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C).THIS IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE . 6. GROUND NO. 5 CHALLENGES THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/ S 234. THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS LEVY OF INTEREST IS MANDATORY AND CON SEQUENTIAL. 7. GROUND NO. 6 IS GENERAL IN NATURE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED IN PART. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF SEPT., 2010. SD/- SD/ (R.V. EASWAR) (J. SUDHAKAR RE DDY) PRESIDENT. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DT: 30 TH SEPT. 2010. WAKODE 3 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, F-BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES