The I.T.O., Ujjain V. M/s. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Ujjain

MA 20/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3763 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 25-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MITRA

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 3 - M.A.NO.19/IND/10 AND 20/IND/2010 KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, AGAR, SHAJAPUR AND KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, BADNAGAR IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : N.A. M.A.NO.19/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO.198/IND/2009) A.Y.2005-06 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 2(1), UJJAIN. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, AGAR, SHAJAPUR VS APPLICANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. : N.A. M.A.NO.20/IND/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A.NO.249/IND/2009) A.Y.2005-06 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 2(1), UJJAIN. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, BADNAGAR. VS APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI P.K.MITRA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE. DATE OF HEARING : 25.06.2010 O R D E R PAGE 2 OF 3 - M.A.NO.19/IND/10 AND 20/IND/2010 KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, AGAR, SHAJAPUR AND KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, BADNAGAR PER V.K. GUPTA, A.M. THROUGH THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS, THE DEPARTMENT HA S STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD TAKEN DIVERGENT VIEWS ON THE ISSUE OF ALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES FOR WHICH PAYMENTS WERE ACTUALLY MADE IN T HE SUBSEQUENT FINANCIAL YEAR. TO PUT IT DIFFERENTLY, IN ONE CASE, ON THE BASIS OF METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING CASH SYST EM OF ACCOUNTING, THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT PAYMENTS ACTUALLY GOING OUT OF T HE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE NEXT FINANCIAL YEAR WERE TO BE CONS IDERED IN THAT YEAR AND NOT IN THE YEAR THE TRIBUNAL AND IN OTHER CASE, TH E ASSESSEES CLAIM WAS ALLOWED IN THE IMPUGNED YEAR ITSELF. HOWEVER, WHEN IT WAS ENQUIRED THAT WHETHER THE EARLIER DECISION WAS CITED IN THE SUBSE QUENT DECISION, THE LD. SENIOR D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT IT WAS NOT SO. IN OUR OPINION, THOUGH THERE ARE TWO DIVERGENT OPINION, HOWEVER, IN THE IM PUGNED ORDER, THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD AND THE MISC. A PPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE IN THE REALM OF REVIEW, WHICH IS N OT PERMISSIBLE. HENCE, WE DISMISS BOTH THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS FILED BY T HE REVENUE. 2. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE, 2010. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (V. K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 25 TH JUNE, 2010. CPU* 256 PAGE 3 OF 3 - M.A.NO.19/IND/10 AND 20/IND/2010 KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, AGAR, SHAJAPUR AND KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, BADNAGAR