The DCIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad V. The Amol Dicalite Ltd., Ahmedabad

MA 241/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6773 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: S N SOPARKAR SRAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.241/AHD/2009 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.1571/AHD/2006) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2002-03 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD V/S . AMOL DICALITE LTD., 301, AKSHAY, 53 SHRIMALI SOCIETY, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD PAN NO.AABCA2807K (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) (ORIGINAL APPELLA NT) (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI S.K. MEENA, DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI S.N. SOPARKAR, SR-AR DATE OF HEARING 12-08-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26-08-2011 O R D E R PER A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) IS FILED BY RE VENUE POINTING OUT CERTAIN MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 0 6-03-2009. 2. THIS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE REVENUE IN THE MA THAT IN THE TRIBUNALS ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE MA TTER WITH THE DIRECTION MA NO.241/AHD/2009 DCIT CIR-1, ABD V. AMOL DICALITE LTD. PAGE 2 THAT IF THE LIABILITY IN RESPECT OF EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN CRYSTALLIZED BEFORE 31-03-2002, DEDUCTION BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE BU T THIS DIRECTION MEANS THAT IF THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN CRYSTALLIZED I N ANY OF THE YEAR PRIOR TO 31-03-2002 AND NOT NECESSARILY IN FINANCIAL YEAR 20 01-02, THE DEDUCTION BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS REQUESTED IN THE MA THAT DIRECTION SHOULD BE SUITABLY AMENDED. 3. LD. DR OF THE REVENUE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUME NT WHICH ARE GIVEN BY THE REVENUE IN THE MA WHEREAS IT WAS SUBMI TTED BY LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY IN THE DIRE CTION OF THE TRIBUNAL BECAUSE IN THE SAME PARA-8 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER, IT IS NOTED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT AS PER THE CERTIFICATE, THE SETTLEMEN T OF THE ACCOUNT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN THE YEAR 2002 AND HENCE THE DIRECTIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT IN CASE, THE ASSESSEE PROVES THAT THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN CRYSTALLIZED BEFORE 31-03-2002 DEDUCTION BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSES SEE DOES NOT MEAN THAT SAME MAY CRYSTALLIZE IN ANY YEAR BEFORE 31-03- 2002 AND THEREFORE THE MA OF THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION. WE FIND THAT IT IS NOTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN PARA-8 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER T HAT IT WAS THE CLAIM BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT EXPENDITURE HAS CRYSTALLIZ ED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO NOTED TH AT IT HAD GONE THROUGH THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY GUJARAT ENERGY DE VELOPMENT AGENCY (GEDA FOR SHORT) AND AS PER THIS CERTIFICATE, IT IS COMING OUT THAT THE SETTLEMENT OF THE ACCOUNT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN THE YE AR 2002. BUT IT DOES NOT GIVE THE DATE WHEN THE ACCOUNT WAS SETTLED. THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD BE READ ALONG WITH THESE OBSERVATIO NS OF THE TRIBUNAL AND IF THIS IS DONE, IT CLEARLY COMES OUT THAT IF T HE LIABILITY HAS CRYSTALLIZED DURING THE PRESENT YEAR BEFORE 31-03-2002 THEN THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE MA NO.241/AHD/2009 DCIT CIR-1, ABD V. AMOL DICALITE LTD. PAGE 3 FOR DEDUCTION. HENCE, WE FEEL THAT THE APPREHENSION OF THE REVENUE IS UNFOUNDED AND THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY IN THE DIRECTIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL BECAUSE THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL IS CLEAR THAT IF THE LIABILITY HAS CRYSTALLIZED DURING THE PRESENT YEAR BEFORE 31-03-2 002 THEN ONLY THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION IN THE PRESENT Y EAR. HENCE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THIS MA OF THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES MA IS DISMISSED SUBJECT TO REMARKS GIVEN IN ABOVE PARA. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 26/08/2011 SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (A.K.G ARODIA) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, DATED : 26/08/2011 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-V, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD