DCIT 24(2), V. NOVA IMPEX,

MA 240/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0930 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES K, MUMBAI .. , ! , ' ## $ ! , % BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JM && !' ./ MA NO.240/MUM/2011 ( )*+ , / ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.5829/MUM/2007) ( $' - $' - $' - $' - / / / / ASST.YEAR 2001-2002) && !' ./ MA NO.242/MUM/2011 ( )*+ , / ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.2/MUM/2007) ( $' - $' - $' - $' - / / / / ASST.YEAR 2003-2004) THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 24(2) MUMBAI. M/S.NOVA IMPEX 403, GODS GIFT, A-WING ADARSH DUGHDALAYA LANE ADARSH NAGAR, MALAD (WEST) MUMBAI 400 064. PAN : AAAFN0739P. ( ! / // / APPLICANT) ' ' ' ' / VS. ( ./01/ RESPONDENT) ! 2 22 2 3 3 3 3 / APPLICANT BY : MS.NEERAJA PRADHAN ./01 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUBHASH CHHAJED ' 2 + / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 13.09.2013. 45- 2 + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.09.2013. !6 !6 !6 !6 / / / / O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THESE TWO MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS U/S.254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 HAVE BEEN MOVED BY THE REVENUE PRAYING FOR THE RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATE D 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2009 PASSED IN ITA NO.2 & 5829/MUM/2007 FOR THE CAP TIONED ASSESSMENT YEARS. MA NOS.240 & 242/MUM/2012 M/S.NOVA IMPEX. 2 2. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDE D THAT THE TRIBUNAL FELL IN ERROR IN REMITTING THE MATTER TO T HE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RECOMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC BY APPLYING THE SPECIAL BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF M/S.TOPMAN EX PORTS (ITA NO.5769/MUM/2006). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THEREAFTER THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KALPATARU COLOURS AND CHEMICALS [(2010) 328 ITR 451 (BOM.)] REVERSED THIS ORDER AND THEREFORE THE PRESENT ORDER SHOULD ALSO CONSEQUENTL Y BE REVERSED. IN THE OPPOSITION, THE LEARNED AR CONTENDED THAT THE S AID ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT ITSELF STANDS REVE RSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOPMAN EXPORTS [(2012) 342 ITR 49 (SC)] . 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THOUGH TH ERE CREPT A MISTAKE WHEN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT REVERSED THE SPECIAL BE NCH ORDER, HOWEVER, SINCE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS APPROV ED THE SPECIAL BENCH VIEW, THERE IS NO NEED TO MAKE ANY RECTIFICAT ION IN THE ORDER AS THE VIEW TAKEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS IN CONFORMI TY WITH THE OPINION EXPRESSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT ON T HIS POINT. MA NOS.240 & 242/MUM/2012 M/S.NOVA IMPEX. 3 4. 7 +8 ! 2 && !' 7' 2 '+ 9: IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 13 TH SEPTEMBER , 2013. !6 2 45- ;!'8 5 2 # SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (R.S.SYAL) $ ! $ ! $ ! $ ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER ! ! ! ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; ;!' DATED : 13 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. DEVDAS* !6 2 .$+<& =&-+ !6 2 .$+<& =&-+ !6 2 .$+<& =&-+ !6 2 .$+<& =&-+/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ! / THE APPLICANT. 2. ./01 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. > () / THE CIT(A) - XXIV, MUMBAI. 4. > / CIT 5. &A# .$+$' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. #B C / GUARD FILE. !6' !6' !6' !6' / BY ORDER, /&+ .$+ //TRUE COPY// ) ) ) )/ // /9 ' 9 ' 9 ' 9 ' ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI