The DCIT, Circle-3, Surat V. M/s. Vishwanagar Corporation, Surat

MA 216/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7934 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: H K LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AN D SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.216/AHD/2011 IN I.T.A. NO. 3395/ AHD/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07) ACIT, CIRCLE-3, SURAT VS. M/S. VISHWANAGAR CORPORATION, S/NO.639, B/H, BHULKA BHAVAN, AHANMD MAHAL ROAD, ADAJAN, SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : AADFV9868J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI H K LAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M K PATEL, AR DATE OF HEARING: 23.03.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 13.04.2012 O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REV ENUE AND IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE REVENUE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT GIVEN CLEAR DIRECTION/FINDING ON T HE 2 ND GROUND I.E. PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCO UNT OF IMPACT FEE OF RS.12,61,240/- WHICH WAS PAID TO SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FOR COVERING THE BALCONY. THE REVENUE HAS SOUGHT CLEAR DIRECTION/FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL ON THIS ISSUE OF IMPACT FEE OF RS.12,6 1,420/-. M.A.NO.216/AHD/2011 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, LD. D.R. OF TH E REVENUE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENT. IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY T HE LD. A.R. THAT IT IS NOTED BY HE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 8 OF THE IMPUGNED TRIB UNAL ORDER THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. A.R. THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL DECISION RENDERED IN THE CASE OF AC IT VS SHRI PRAKASH RANCHODJI PATEL IN I.T.A.NO. 1676/AHD/2009 DATE 28. 09.2009 A COPY OF WITH TRIBUNAL DECISION WAS ALSO SUBMITTED. IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT IN THAT CASE ALSO, THE ISSUE WAS WITH REGARD TO PAYMEN T MADE TO SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION IN RESPECT OF CARRYING OUT CO NSTRUCTION OF BALCONY AND IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT CASE THAT P AYMENT WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BEING THE F EE FOR COVERING BALCONY AFTER PERMISSION OF SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORA TION WAS GRANTED AND HENCE, THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF ANY LAW AND, THEREF ORE, DEDUCTION IS ALLOWABLE FOR SUCH PAYMENT. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTE D BY THE LD. A.R. THAT IN SPITE OF THIS SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS DULY NOTED BY THE TRIBUNAL, NO CLEAR FINDING IS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL REGARDING THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IN THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FI ND THAT ALTHOUGH IT WAS THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO.2 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BUT BY INADVERTENT MISTAKE, NO CLEAR FINDING WAS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL REGARDING THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE. HENCE, NOW, WE RECTIFY THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER TO THIS EXTENT AND W E HOLD THAT SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO.2 OF THE REVENUES APPE AL IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL DECISION REN DERED IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS SHRI PRAKASH RANCHODJI PATEL (SUPRA), NO IN TERFERENCE IS CALLED M.A.NO.216/AHD/2011 3 FOR IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. ACCOR DINGLY, GROUND NO.2 OF THE REVENUE IS REJECTED. 4. AS PER THE FINAL CONCLUSION OF THE IMPUGNED TRIB UNAL ORDER, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSE AND THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE IN THE CONCLUSION OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISPOSED OFF IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE M ENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD./- SD./- (MUKUL KUMAR SHRAWAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BY ORDER 6. THE GUARD FILE AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 30/3 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 3/4 .OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P .S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 13/4 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.13/4 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 13/4/12 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER. .