M/s. Purbanchal Power Co.Ltd., Kolkata V. ITO, Ward-8(3), Kolkata, Kolkata

MA 139/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9409 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

M.A . NO. 139/KOL/2012 ( IN I.T.A. NO.:1502/ KOL. / 2011) ASSESSM ENT YEAR : 2006-07 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER), AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) M.A. NO. 139/KOL./2012 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.: 1502/ KOL. / 2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. PURBANCHAL POWER CO. LIMITED...APPLICANT 5, RUSSEL STREET, KOLKATA-700 001 [PAN : AABCP 7523 R] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER, .....RESPONDENT, WARD-8(3), KOLKATA AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 069 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI MANOJ KATARUKA, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT SHRI S.K. SINHA, SR. DR. FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : OCTOBER 05, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : OCTOBER 0 5, 2012 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. BY WAY OF THIS RECTIFICATION PETITION, OUR ATTEN TION IS INVITED TO THE FACT THAT OUR ORDER DATED 3 RD JULY, 2012 SUFFERS FROM A MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD INASMUCH AS GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 AR E NOT DISPOSED OF AT ALL. 2. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, AND HAVING P ERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD T AKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE US :- M.A . NO. 139/KOL/2012 ( IN I.T.A. NO.:1502/ KOL. / 2011) ASSESSM ENT YEAR : 2006-07 PAGE 2 OF 3 (1) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO UPHOLD THE ADDITION S MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS.6,54,309/- ON ACCOUNT O F LEGAL EXPENSES U/S. 40(A)(IA) IS BAD IN LAW. (2) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO CONFIRM THE ADDITIO NS MADE BY THE A.O. OF RS.6,54,309/- U/S. 40(A)(IA) ON ACCO UNT OF REIMBURSEMENT OF LEGAL EXPENSES IS WITHOUT CONSIDER ING THE MATERIAL AND EVIDENCES FILED ON RECORD. (3) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) NOT TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF TDS OF RS.1,20,435/- EVEN THOUGH THE INCOME THEREON WAS TA XED, IS ERRONEOUS AND BAD IN LAW. (4) THAT THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DIRECT THE A.O. TO VERIFY AND ALLOW TDS AS PER LAW WITHOUT HIMSELF ALL OWING THE SAME AS PER LAW IS UNJUST AND BAD IN LAW. (5) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AND THEREAFTER UPHELD BY THE CIT(A) ARE UNJUST, ILLEGAL , ARBITRARY AND EXCESSIVE. (6) THAT THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO AND UPHELD BY THE CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW. (7) THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WILL BE ARGUED IN DE TAILS AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL IF ANY AND OR A LTER, VARY, MODIFY OR RECTIFY ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. WE FIND THAT WHILE FIRST TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL W ERE DISPOSED OF, VIDE OUR ORDER DATED 3 RD JULY, 2012 (SUPRA), AND THE MATTER WAS THUS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR F RESH ADJUDICATION, THE OTHER FIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WERE LEFT UNTOUCHED. M.A . NO. 139/KOL/2012 ( IN I.T.A. NO.:1502/ KOL. / 2011) ASSESSM ENT YEAR : 2006-07 PAGE 3 OF 3 4. LEARNED COUNSEL FAIRLY STATES THAT GROUND NOS. 5 , 6 AND 7 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND CALL FOR NO ADJUDICATION, AND ONLY GROUND NOS. 3 AND 4 NEED TO BE TAKEN UP FOR CONSIDERATION. LEARNE D D.R. DOES NOT OPPOSE THE PRAYER. 5. WE SEE MERITS IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE. WE OU GHT TO HAVE DISPOSED OF GROUND NOS. 3 &4 ON MERITS, BUT WE SIMP LY DID NOT DEAL WITH THE SAME. IT WAS AN INADVERTENT ERROR OF OMISS ION. WE, ACCORDINGLY, RECALL OUR ORDER DATED 3 RD JULY, 2012 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF GROUND NOS. 3 & 4. WITH THE CONSENT OF T HE PARTIES, THE DATE FOR THIS HEARING IS FIXED ON 26.03.2013 . NO SEPARATE NOTICE NEED BE ISSUED FOR THE ABOVE SCHEDULED HEARING. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLO WED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH OCTOBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR SINGH PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACC OUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 5 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012 COPIES TO : (1) THE APPLICANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.