AMBERNATH ORGANICS P. LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT WD 10(1), MUMBAI

ITA 8752/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3455 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARUN SATHE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUM BAI .. , ! , '# ' $ BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA , AM ./ I.T.A. NO. 8752/MUM/2010 ( & ' (' & ' (' & ' (' & ' (' / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) AMBERNATH ORGANICS PVT. LTD. 314, CREATIVE INUSTRIAL PREMISES, ROAD NO.2, SUNDER NAGAR, KALINA, MUMBAI-400 098 & & & & / VS. DY. CIT, WARD 10(1), AAYKAR BHAVAN, 4 TH FLOOR, R. NO.461, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020 ) '# ./ * ./ PAN/GIR NO. AAAC 3839 N ( )+ / APPELLANT ) : ( ,-)+ / RESPONDENT ) )+ . ' / APPELLANT BY : SHRI ARUN SATHE & MS. AARTI SATHE ,-)+ / . ' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR & / 01# / // / DATE OF HEARING : 19.06.2013 2 ( / 01# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.06.2013 '3 / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-X, MUMBAI (CIT(A) FOR SHO RT) DATED 13.08.2010, PARTLY ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL CONTESTING ITS ASSES SMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR (A.Y.) 2007-08 VIDE ORDER DATED 23.12.2009. 2 ITA NO.8752/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2007-08) AMBERNATH ORGANICS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR, THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL, THAT BOTH THE ISSUES BEING AGITATED BY THE ASSESSEE PER ITS I NSTANT APPEAL STAND DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS OWN CASE FOR A PRECEDING YEAR, I.E. , A.Y. 2005-06, PLACING A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER (IN ITA NO.4554/MUM/2009 DATED 09.03.201 1) ON RECORD. HE WOULD THEN TAKE US TO THE RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS OF THE SAID ORDER TO ILLUSTRATE THE SAME, AS WELL AS THE DECISION BY THE TRIBUNAL ON THE RELEVANT ISSUES, FU RTHER PLEADING FOR FOLLOWING THE SAME; THERE BEING NO CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S FOR THE YEAR VIS--VIS THE SAID YEAR. THE LD. DR COULD NOT BRING TO OUR NOTICE ANY CHANG E IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE VIS-A-VIS THE REFERENCE YEAR, I.E., A.Y . 2005-06, FOR THE ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES CASE TO BE INAPPLICABLE OR TO APPLY WITH ANY MODIFICATION/S. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. 3.1 THE FIRST GROUND ASSUMED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN RESPECT OF AN ADDITION IN THE SUM OF RS.8,65,056/- IN RESPECT OF UNUTILIZED MODVAT CREDI T. THE TRIBUNAL FOUND AS A FACT, VIDE PARA 5 OF ITS ORDER SUPRA, THAT FULL EFFECT TO THE PROVISION OF SECTION 145A OF THE ACT HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN APPLYING THE SAME, APPROPRIATING THE BALANCE OUTSTANDING IN THE UNUTILIZED MODVAT/CENVAT ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSEES INCOME. THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BEING THE SAME, W E DIRECT LIKEWISE, RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. WITH A DIRECTION TO SC RUPULOUSLY FOLLOW THE MANDATE OF SECTION 145A OF THE ACT, SO THAT BOTH THE OPENING AND THE C LOSING INVENTORIES, AS WELL AS THE PURCHASES AND SALES FOR THE YEAR, WOULD STAND TO BE VALUED AT GROSS OF ALL THE LEVIES INCIDENT THEREON, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE METHOD OF ACC OUNTING BEING ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 3.2 THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED PER THE INSTANT APPEAL IS IN RESPECT OF A DISALLOWANCE IN THE SUM OF RS.1,80,000/- PAID TO ONE, SHRI T. RAVINDRAN ATHAN, AN EX-DY. DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CHEMICAL LABORATORIES, PUNE. THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISCU SSED THIS ISSUE AT PARAS 7 TO 9 OF ITS ORDER SUPRA. AFTER EXAMINING THE FACTS, IT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD COMPLETELY FAILED TO ESTABLISH EITHER THE NATURE OF THE SERVICES RENDERED BY THE SAID SHRI T. 3 ITA NO.8752/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2007-08) AMBERNATH ORGANICS PVT. LTD. VS. DY. CIT RAVINDRANATHAN OR EVEN THE ACTUAL RENDERING OF SERV ICES BY HIM, AND CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE. THE FACTS AS WELL AS THE RESPECTIVE C ASES OF PARTIES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR BEING THE SAME AS THAT FOR THE REFERENCE YEAR, WE H AVE NO HESITATION TO, FOLLOWING THE SAME, DIRECT LIKEWISE, EVEN AS OBSERVED AT THE CONC LUSION OF THE HEARING. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES GROUND NO.2. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 05 & '40 / 6/ 78'9 ' 3 :0 / 0 ;< ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JUNE 19, 2013 '3 / 2 ( #' =&5 >& 19 , 2013 / C SD/- SD/- (I. P. BANSAL) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; =& DATED : 19.06.2013 .&../ ROSHANI , SR. PS '3 / ,0D E'D(0 '3 / ,0D E'D(0 '3 / ,0D E'D(0 '3 / ,0D E'D(0/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. )+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-)+ / THE RESPONDENT 3. F ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. F / CIT - CONCERNED 5. DIC ,0& , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. CJ' K / GUARD FILE '3& '3& '3& '3& / BY ORDER, 7 77 7/ // /; ; ; ; (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI