Asst. Comm. of Income-tax, Kolhapur V. Caspro Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur

MA 161/PUN/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8843 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2012
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MISHRA
• Keywords: Question of law; Tax effect

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER , AND SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MA.NO.161/PN/2011 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 794/PN/2009 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2000-01) ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOLHAPUR .. APPLICANT VS. CASPRO METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., E-1, MIDC, SHIROLI, KOLHAPUR. .. RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI ALOK MISHRA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK DATE OF HEARING : 03-08-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-08-2012 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM : THIS MA HAS BEEN FILED BY REVENUE WHEREIN DISMISSAL OF THE REVENUE APPEAL IN VIEW OF CBDT INSTRUCTION N O. 3 DATED 09-02-2011 AS TAX EFFECT WAS FOUND TO BE BELO W RS. 3 LAKHS. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE THAT IN VIEW OF THE SUPREME COURT DE CISION DATED 01-09-2011 IN THE CASE OF SURYA HERBALS LTD. DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE RECTIFIED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) OF I.T. ACT. ACCORDIN GLY REQUESTED TO RECALL THE ORDER IN QUESTION. 2. ON OTHER HAND LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF 2 CIT VS.SMT. VARSHA DILIP KOLHE HAS DISMISSED THE RE VENUE APPEAL BY OBSERVING AS UNDER : 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE P RESENT CASE AND IN OUR VIEW THIS APPEAL DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY CA SCADING EFFECT AND IT IS NOT POINTED TO US THAT SEVERAL APP EALS ARISE THE POINT WHICH IS INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL. 6. THE QUESTION OF LAW AS FRAMED IN THE APPEAL MEMO ARE: I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CA SE THE TRIBUNAL WAS JUSTIFIED IN REVERSING THE ORDER O F THE CIT(A) ? II) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE ITAT WAS RIGHT IN DIRECTING THE ASSESS ING OFFICER TO ALLOW DEDUCTION OF INTEREST PAYMENT ON F UNDS INTRODUCED IN THE FIRM, (IN THE FORM OF LOAN), AGAI NST REMUNERATION RECEIVED FROM THE FIRM? 7. QUESTION NO. 1 APPEARS TO BE A QUESTION OF FACT. IT IS NOT SHOWN TO US THAT SECOND QUESTION IS INVOLVED IN MAN Y APPEALS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE SUBMISSION OF LEARNED A.S .G. THAT A DECISION IN THE APPEAL WOULD HAVE A CASCADING EFFEC T ALSO CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. MR. SHARMA STATES THAT THE CIR CULAR IS SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THE APPEAL AND, THEREFO RE, CASCADING EFFECT COULD NOT BE SHOWN. THIS VERY SUBMISSION WA S ADVANCED BY MR. SHARMA AND THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED ONCE TO ENABLE MR. SHARMA TO POINT OUT WHETHER SIMILAR Q UESTION IS INVOLVED IN ANY OTHER APPEAL. TILL TODAY, THE LEARN ED COUNSEL WAS UNABLE TO POINT OUT A SINGLE OTHER CASE N WHICH SIMILAR QUESTION IS INVOLVED. 8. APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED EVEN IN THE CASE BEFORE US THERE IS NO CASCADING EF FECT IN ASSESSEES APPEAL AS WELL. SO FOLLOWING THE ABOVE SAID REASONING IN SMT. VARSHA DILIP KOLHE (SUPRA) THE OR DER OF ITAT IN QUESTION CANNOT BE DISTURBED AT THE STRENGT H OF THIS APPLICATION. ACCORDINGLY APPLICATION IN QUESTION I S DISMISSED. 3 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MA FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 03 RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2012. SD/- SD/- ( G.S. PANNU ) ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YA DAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MSK PUNE, DATED THE 03 RD AUGUST 2012 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A), KOLHAPUR. 4. THE DR B BENCH, PUNE. 5. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE.