THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO OP MARKETOING FEDERATION LTD, V. ASST CIT 13(3),

MA 225/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2141 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 37

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - B BENCH , MK0 ,L VH ,E IKOYU MK0 ,L VH ,E IKOYU MK0 ,L VH ,E IKOYU MK0 ,L VH ,E IKOYU BEFORE S/SH. RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DR. S.T.M . PAVALAN,JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO.225/MUM/2013-ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 8289/M UM/2010-ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 THE MAHARASHTRA STATE COOP. MARKETING FEDERATION LTD., KANMOOR HOUSE, NARSI NATHA ST., MASJID, MUMBAI-400009 PAN: AAAT6118L VS. ACIT CIRCLE 13(3), ROOM NO. 427, 4TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN,MUMBAI-400020 ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAVINDER SINDHU / DATE OF HEARING : 27-06-2014 !'#$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27-06-2014 % % % % &' &' &' &' , 1961 & & & & 254 )1( ( ( ( ( %) %) %) %) ORDER U/S.254 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA,AM : VIDE ITS APPLICATION DATED 10.06.2013 ASSESSEE-COOP ERATIVE SOCIETY HAS STATED THAT THERE IS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBU NAL ON 18.04.2013,THAT SAME SHOULD BE RECTIFIED U/S.254 (2) OF THE ACT.ON 28.02.2014 AUTH ORISED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) OF THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON AND ACCORDINGLY MATTER WAS P OSTED FOR HEARING ON17.03.2014.BUT,NO ONE APPEARED ON THAT DAY.AFTER THAT ON THREE OCCASIONS THE ASSESSEE WAS INFORMED BY REGISTERED LETTERS TO ATTEND THE HEARING,BUT NEITHER SOMEBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ADJOURNMENT WAS ASKED FOR.THEREFORE, WE ARE DECIDING THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 2. AS PER THE ASSESSEE WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL FOR T HE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION,TRIBUNAL HAD DISALLOWED TRANSPORT AND HAMALI CHARGES,THAT IT HAD FOLLOWED THE ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE AY.2005-06,THAT THE ORDER FOR THAT YEAR WAS RECALLED BY THE TRIBUNAL,THAT DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER 18.04.2013 SHOU LD BE RECALLED,THAT IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS NO DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE UNDER THE HEAD TRANSPORT AND HAMALI CHARGES.WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION TRIBUNAL HAS ADJUD ICATED THE ISSUE OF TRANSPORT AND HAMALI CHARGES AS UNDER : 5.IN GROUND NO. 2 OF APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS DISPUTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED C.LT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF TRANSPORTATION AND HAMALI CHARG ES OF RS.15,37,516/-. 6.THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE SAID CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSPORTATION AND HAMALI CHARGES OF RS. 15,37,516/- DEBITED BY TH E ASSESSEE TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH REQUISITE DETA ILS. IN THE FIRST APPEAL, LEARNED C.I.T(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON TH E GROUND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY HIM IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 VIDE ORDER DATED 3.6 .2008 AND THE MARTIAL FACTS CONTINUE TO BE THE SAME IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HE NCE, ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7.AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED A.R SUBMITTED THA T AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, A.O DID NOT ASK FOR REQUISITE DETAILS AND HENCE ASSESSEE CO ULD NOT FURNISH THE SAME. IN REPLY TO A QUERY BY 2 M.A.NO. 225/MUM/2013 THE MAHARASHTRA STATE COOP. MAR KETING FEDERATION LTD . THE BENCH, AS TO WHETHER THE REQUISITE DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BEFORE LEARNED C.I.T(A), LEARNED A.R SUBMITTED IN THE NEGATIVE. IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT A T THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, THE BREAK UP OF THE SAID EXPENSES AND/OR THE DETAILS IN REGARD TO T HE SAID CLAIM IS NOT PLACED BEFORE US. 8.THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CLAIM HAS BEEN DISALLOWED BECAUSE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH REQUISITE DETAILS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS W ELL AS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN PAPER BOOK.9. CONSIDERING ABOVE FACTS, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON T O INTERFERE IN ORDER OF LEARNED C.I.T(A) AND CONFIRM THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW. 3. FROM THE ABOVE ORDER IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED ANY DETAILS OF TRANSPORT AND HAMALI CHARGES BEFORE THE AO/FAA OR THE TRIBUNAL.PR OVISIONS OF SECTION 37 CLEARLY STIPULATES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO PROVE THAT PARTICULAR EXPE NDITURE WAS INCURRED BY IT FOR CARRYING OUT BUSINESS FOR THAT YEAR. IF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT DISC HARGE THE ONUS CAST UPON IT,CLAIM MADE BY IT HAS TO BE DISALLOWED.IN THE MATTER BEFORE US,ALL THE TH REE AUTHORITIES HAVE GIVEN A CATEGORICAL FINDING OF FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH REQUISIT E INFORMATION.THEREFORE,IN OUR OPINION THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBU NAL.AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL A REASONED ORDER WAS PASSED BY TH E TRIBUNAL.IN THE NAME OF RECTIFICATION APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE WANTS US TO REVIEW THE IMP UGNED ORDER DATED 18.04.2013.PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254(2) DO NOT ALLOW REVIEW OF EARLIER ORDER .THERE IS NO ARITHMETICAL MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OR LEGAL POSITION HAS NOT ALTERED BECAUSE OF SUBSEQUEN T JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OR THE APEX COURT.IT IS A PURE AND SIMPLE MATTER DECID ED ON AVAILABLE FACTS.WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS A RESULT,M.A. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. * + &, - . ( / 01 . ORDER PRONOUNCED I N THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH ,JUNE, 2014 . %) !'#$ '2 3 27 4 , 201 4 ' ( 5 SD/- SD/- ( MK MKMK MK0 00 0 ,L VH ,E IKOYU ,L VH ,E IKOYU ,L VH ,E IKOYU ,L VH ,E IKOYU / DR. S.T.M.PAVALAN) ( / RAJENDRA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER '6 / MUMBAI, 3 /DATE: 27.06.2014. SK %) %) %) %) 7 7 7 7 87# 87# 87# 87# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ 69 % %: , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 69 % %: 5. DR B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / 7;( & C CC CH HH H <= , % . . . '6 6. GUARD FILE/ (< * 7 7 7 7 //TRUE COPY// %) / BY ORDER, > / 0 DY./ASST. REGISTRAR % &$ , '6 /ITAT, MUMBAI