M/s Promukh Hoffmann International Limited, Secunderabad V. ACIT, Circle-16(3), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

MA 163/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2806 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: C P RAMASWAMI
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISC. APPLICATION NO.162/HYD/2014 (IN ITA NO.348/HYD/2010) :ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4 - 0 5 MISC. APPLICATION NO.163/HYD/2014 (IN C.O.NO.19/HYD./11 IN ITA NO.1314/HYD/2010) :ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 3 - 0 4 M/S. PROMUKH HOFFMANN INTERNATIONAL LTD., SECUNDERABAD. (PAN AA CCP 3340 H ) V/S. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 16(3), HYDERABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPL IC ANT BY : S HRI C.P.RAMASWAMI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAMAKRISHNA BANDI DR DATE OF HEARING 06 . 2 .201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20.03.2015 O R D E R PER B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : BY TH E S E A PPLICATION S UN D ER S.254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961, WHICH ARE ALMOST IDENTICALLY WORDED, THE APPLICANT - ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION/RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 14.10.2011 INTER - ALIA IN ITA NO.348/ H YD/2010 OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 AND CROSS OBJECTION NO.19/HYD/2011 OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1314/HYD/2010 OF THE RE VENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04, ON THE G R OUND THAT CERTA IN MISTAKES APP A RENT FROM RECORD HAVE CREPT INTO THE SAME. M A NO.1 62 & 163 /HYD/201 4 (IN I TA NO .3 48 /H YD/20 1 0 & CO 198/HYD /11 ) M/S.PROMUKH HOFFMANN INTERNATIONAL LTD., SECUNDERABAD. 2 2. REIT E RATING THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THESE APPLICATIONS, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE T RIBUNAL IN PARA 12 OF THE COMMON ORDER ON PAGES NO.10 THEREOF. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT WHILE ON ONE HAND , IN THE INITIAL PORTION OF PARA 12 ON PAGE 10 OF THE ORD E R, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS COMPLETED ONLY SETTING UP OF THE PLANT AND MA C HIN E RY AND ESTABLISHING OF MANUFACT URING FACILITY FOR COMM E NCIN G THE BU S IN E SS AS AND WHEN OTHER PRE - REQUISITES ARE FULFILLED , IT CONCLUDED IN THE LATER PO R TION OF PARA 12 ON PAGE 10 OF THE ORDER THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE REASONING GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) BEFORE CONCLUDING THAT THE AS SESSEE CANNOT BE S AID TO HAVE SET UP THE BU S IN E SS , AND HAVING NOT COMMENCED THUS THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY, NO BUSINESS INCOM E COUL D B E ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . IN VIEW OF TH E SE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL, IT IS PRAYED T H A T T HE ORDER OF THI S TRIBUNAL DATED 14.10.2011 IS LIABLE TO B E RECTIFIED OR RECALLED. 3. T H E LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 14.10.2011 , WARRANTING ANY RECTIFICATION OR RECALL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES ON THESE APPLICATIONS AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON AN OVERALL READING OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 14.10.2011, WARRANTING ANY RECTIFICATION OR RECALL, EVEN THOUGH THERE APPEARS SOME CONFUSION WHEN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF PARA 12 OF THE ORDER, DISCUSSED IN THESE APPLICATIONS, ARE READ IN ISOLATION . HAVING CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), A LL THAT THE M A NO.1 62 & 163 /HYD/201 4 (IN I TA NO .3 48 /H YD/20 1 0 & CO 198/HYD /11 ) M/S.PROMUKH HOFFMANN INTERNATIONAL LTD., SECUNDERABAD. 3 TRIBUNAL HAS HELD, WHICH WE HEREBY CLARIFY, IS THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN BE SAID TO HAVE COMPLETED THE PROCESS OF SETTING UP OF THE PLANT AND MACHINERY AND ESTABLISHING OF MANUFACTURING FACILITY FOR COMMENCING THE BUSINESS AS AND WHEN OTHER PRE - REQUISITES ARE FULFILLED, BUT NOT ACTUALLY COMMENCED THE BUSINESS; AND SINCE NO BUSINESS, THUS, HAS COMMENCED IN THE RELEVANT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION , NO BUSINESS INCOME COULD BE BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE PRESENT APPLI C ATION S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DEVOID OF MERIT. THEY ARE ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPLICATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE REJECTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 20 TH MARCH, 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) ( B.RAMAKOTAIAH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT/ - 20 TH MARCH, 2015 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. PROMUKH HOFFMANN INTERNATIONAL LTD., 204 SWAPNALOK COMPLEX, SECUNDERABAD. 2 . DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 16( 3 ), HYDERABAD 3. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) V, HYDERABAD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX IV, HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S