The ACIT, Ahmedabad Circle-3, Ahmedabad V. M/s. Shaym Industries, Ahmedabad

MA 214/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8464 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K VOHRA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: SRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND , SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE ACIT, CIR-3 AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) VS. M/S SHYAM INDUSTRIES (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAFFS4338E DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI R.K.VOHRA, SR. D.R. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TUSHAR P.HEMANI, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 06-07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06-07-2012 / ORDER PER : A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS MA IS FILED BY THE REVENUE POINTING OUT CERTAI N MISTAKES IN THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER. IT IS A C ONTENTION THAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE WA S DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL REGARDING REDUCTION OF FACE VALUE O F DEPB FROM SALE PROCEEDS OF DEPB BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIO N OF SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF TOPMAN EXPORTS AS REPORTED IN 125 TTJ (MUMBAI SB) 2 89. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THEREAFTER, THERE IS THE JUDGMENT OF HOBBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CIT VS. KALPATARU COLOURS AND CHEMICALS 235 CTR 313 AND THE REFORE M.A. NO. 214/AHD/2011 (ARISING OUT FROM ITA NO. 397/A/2007) A. Y. 2003-04 M.A. NO. 214 OF 2011 A.Y. :- 2003-04 2 ,THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER IS HAVING AN APPARENT MISTAKE WHICH SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. LD. DR OF REVENUE REITERATED THE SAME CONTENTIONS WHICH ARE RAISED IN THE MA FILED BY THE REVENUE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY A R OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SUBSEQ UENT JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT CITED BY THE REVENUE HAVING RENDERED IN THE KALPTARU COLOURS AND CHEMICAL (SUPRA) IS NOT THE DECISION OF JURISDICT IONAL HIGH COURT AND THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THERE I S AN APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NOW THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE APEX COU RT IS AVAILABLE WHICH IS IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE HAVING REN DERED IN THE CASE OF TOPMAN EXPORTS ITSELF WHICH IS REPORTED AT 305 ITR 227 (SUPREME COURT) AND THEREFORE, THE MA OF T HE REVENUE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 2. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND WE FIND THAT THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH RENDERED IN THE TOPMAN EX PORTS (SUPRA) WAS FOLLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNE D TRIBUNAL ORDER. THEREAFTER, THE JUDGMENT OF HONBL E BOMBAY HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE KALPTARU COLOURS AND CHEMICALS (SUPRA) IS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BUT THIS IS NOT JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND MOREOVER, NOW THE JUD GMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE TOPMAN EXPORTS ( SUPRA) IS AVAILABLE WHICH IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER IS IN LINE WITH THIS JUDGME NT OF HONBLE APEX COURT CITED BY LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE TRI BUNAL ORDER. THUS THE MA OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, MA OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ABOVE. SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) (A.K.GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER M.A. NO. 214 OF 2011 A.Y. :- 2003-04 3 A. KUMAR, P.S. / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. - / CIT (A) 5. , ! , '# / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. $% &' / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , ( / ' ) ! , '# STRENGTHEN PREPARATION & DELIVERY OF ORDERS IN THE ITAT 1) DATE OF TAKING DICTATION 09-07-2012 2) DIRECT DICTATION BY MEMBER STRAIGHT ON COMPUTER/LAPTOP/DRAGON DICTATE N.A. 3) DATE OF TYPING & DRAFT ORDER PLACE BEFORE MEMBER 10-07-2012 4) DATE OF CORRECTION 5) DATE OF FURTHER CORRECTION 6) DATE OF INITIAL SIGN BY MEMBERS 7) ORDER UPLOADED ON 8) ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD HAS BEEN ENCLOSED IN THIS FILE YES 9) FINAL ORDER AND 2 ND COPY SEND TO BENCH CLERK ON