RACHLINE LEASING AND FINANCE P. LTD, MUMBAI V. DCITY 4(2), MUMBAI

ITA 8572/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 75507 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 05-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: APURV GANDHI

Judgement Text

, ,, , , ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI , ! ! ! ! '# , , $% $ $$ $ & & & & BEFORE SRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM ./ I.T.A. NO. 8572/MUM/2010 ( ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( )( )( )( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 ) M/S RICHLINE LEASING AND FINANCE PVT. LTD. ROOM NO.9-10 BRIJWASI MANSION, DADI SETH AGIARY LANE, 6, NAVI WADI, MUMBAI-400002 ' ' ' ' / VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(2) MUMBAI-400020 * $% ./ PAN : AAACR2114B ( *+ / ASSESSEE ) .. ( ,-*+ / RESPONDENT ) *+ . / $ / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI APURV GANDHI ,-*+ . / $ / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN ' . 0% / DATE OF HEARING : 05.02.2014 1') . 0% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.02.2014 $2 / O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.11.10 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE ASS ESSEE HAS RAISED SOLITARY GROUND IN THIS APPEAL AS UNDER. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF A.O. IN DI SALLOWING RS.10,00,000 BEING SUB-BROKERAGE PAID TO M/S ASHUTOSH METAL PVT. LTD. THE APPELLANT PRYAS THAT THE SAID EXPENSES BEING A BUSINESS EXPEN SE OUGHT TO BE ALLOWED AND CONSEQUENTLY THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.10,00,000/- MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. 2 ITA NO.8572/MUM/2010 M/S. RICHLINE LEASING AND FINANCE PVT. LTD. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A LETTER DATED 4 TH FEBRUARY 2013 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT WANT TO PRESS THE SOLE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL. ACC ORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED TO ALLOW IT TO WITHDRAW THE PRESENT APPEA L. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. IN VIEW OF THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE BY LETTER DATED 4 TH FEBRUARY 2013, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED AS NOT PRESSED/WITHDRAWN. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT ON 05/02/2014 . $2 . 1') %$ 3' 05/02/2014 , ' . 4 SD/- ( SANJAY ARORA ) SD/- ( VIJAY PAL RAO) $% / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 3' /DATED : 05 /02/ 2014 F{X~{T? P.S. $2 . ,0 5$)0 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) ' (60 / THE ASSESSEE; (2) / THE REVENUE; (3) 7 ( ) / THE CIT(A); (4) 7 / THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) 84 ,0' , , / THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) 4( 9 / GUARD FILE. -0 ,0 / TRUE COPY $2' / BY ORDER : / ; / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI