M/s Wevin Private Limited , Bangalore V. IncomeTax Officer Ward-7(1)(4), Bangalore

MA 157/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0776 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Valuation report; Set aside
• Section: 13; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES A BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.146/BANG/2019 (IN IT (TP) A. NO. 2710 /BANG/201 7 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 13 - 14 ) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(1)(4), BANGALORE. . PETITIONER. VS. M/S. WEVIN PVT. LTD., NO.143 - E, 1 ST & 2 ND PHASE, BOMMASANDRA INDL. AREA, BANGALORE - 560 099 RESPONDENT. M.P. NO.157/BANG/2019 (IN IT (TP) A. NO. 2710 /BANG/201 7 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 13 - 14 ) (BY ASSESSEE) REVENUE BY: SHRI M A NJEET SINGH, ADDL. CIT (D.R) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI PADAMCHAND KHINCHA, CA DATE OF HEARING : 10.01 .20 20. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 .0 6 .20 20. O R D E R PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : T HE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE SUBMITTING THAT THERE ARE MISTAKES APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER PASSED IN IT (TP) A NO.2710/BANG/2017 DT.12.06.2019 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013 - 14 . 2 M P NOS.146 & 157/BANG/2019 2. FIRST, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE ASSESSEE MISC. P ETITION NO.157/BANG/2019. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE HONBLE ITAT ORDER WITH RESPECT TO DISMISSAL OF OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL OBSERVED AT PAGE 16 PARA 10 OF THE ORDER READ AS UNDER: 10. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LEARNED AR HAS ARGUED ONLY ON THE GROUNDS IN RELATION TO ADDITION OF CONTROL PREMIUM REJECTION OF RISK - FREE RATE AND REJECTION OF COMPANIES SPECIFIC PREMIUM (CSRP) AND REJECTION OF GROWTH RATE AND TERMINAL GROWTH RATE WHERE THE AS SESSEE HAS ADOPTED AT 2% BASED ON VALUATION REPORT WHEREAS THE TPO ADOPTED 6% AND THE LEARNED AR HAS NOT ARGUED OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND SAME ARE TREATED AS NOT PRESSED AND DISMISSED. T HE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EMPHASIZED ON PARA 5OF MISC. PETITION AS UNDER: A ND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHEN ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF DRP FOR ADJUDICATION AND FRESH CONSIDERATION, THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED ANY OTHER GROUNDS , NEEDS TO BE MODIFIED, AND PRAYED THAT OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL SHALL ALSO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF DRP. T HE LEARNED 3 M P NOS.146 & 157/BANG/2019 DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED THE TRIBUNAL ORDER. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL IN PAGE 16 PARA 10 OF THE ORDER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT ARGUED OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND TREATED AS NOT PRESSED AND DI SMISSED. THE CONTENTION S OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT SINCE THE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE APPEA L HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF DRP FOR F RESH CONSIDERATION. SIMILARLY THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE SHALL ALSO BE KEPT OPEN FOR AD JUDICATION BY THE DRP AND PRAYED FOR MODIFICATION. WE HAVE RESTORED THE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUE TO THE FILE OF DRP AND TO PASS A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER. WE FOUND THE MISTAKE POINTED OUT BY ASSESSEE I S A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. ACCORDINGLY, WE SUBSTITUTE PARAGRAPHS 10 AND 11 WITH THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS : 10 . WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LEARNED AR HAS ARGUED ON THE GROUNDS IN RELATION TO ADDITION OF CONTROL PREMIUM REJECTION OF RISK - FREE RATE AND REJECTION OF COMPANIES SPECIFIC PREMIUM (CSRP) AND REJECTION OF GROWTH RATE AND TERMINAL GROWTH RATE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS ADOPTED AT 2% BASED ON VALUATION REPORT WHEREAS THE TPO ADOPTED 6% . 4 M P NOS.146 & 157/BANG/2019 11. IN TH E RESULT, THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 . W E SHALL TAKE UP REVENUES MISC. PETITION MP 146/BANG/2019.THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS REMANDED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF DISPUTE R ESOLUTION PANEL (DRP).WHEREAS, THE ITAT RULES,1963 PRESCRIBES THAT WHERE THE TRIBUNAL IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE CASE SHOULD BE REMANDED, IT MAY REMAND IT TO THE AUTHORITY FROM WHOSE ORDER, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED OR TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WITH S UCH DIRECTIONS AS THE TRIBUNAL MAY THINK FIT AND EMPHASIZED THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL CAN SET ASIDE THE MATTER ONLY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WHEREAS THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL AND RELIED ON THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN ITO VS. WEG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. M.P. NO.52/BANG/2019DT.28.08.2019. WE FOUND SIMILAR CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED BY REVENUE IN ITO VS. WEG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD (SUPRA) AND THE CO ORDI NATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL HAS REJECTED THE ARGUMENTS OF REVENUE AND HELD IN PARA 6 WHICH IS READ AS UNDER : 5 M P NOS.146 & 157/BANG/2019 6 . WE HEA R D THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FOLLOW THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENCE, AND FOUND THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER AS THE TRIBUNAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF DRP AND NOT TO THE A.O. HENCE, THE MISC. PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE M ISC. P ETITION IS PARTLY ALLOWED AND REVENUES M ISC. P ETITION IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. S D / - S D / - ( B.R. B ASKARAN ) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1 0 .0 6 . 20 20 . *REDDY GP 6 M P NOS.146 & 157/BANG/2019 COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE