Carburettors Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

MA 26/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6723 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ROHINI
• Assessee Lawyers: R SIVARAMAN
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI . . . , , $ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 26 / CHNY /20 18 (IN ITA NO.209/CHNY/2017) % % /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S.CARBURETTORS LTD., RAHEJA TOWERS, 7 TH FLOOR, SIGMA WING NO.177, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-600 002. [PAN: AAACC 1299 E] VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI-600 034. ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) ( + / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.SIVARAMAN, ADV. )*( + /RESPONDENT BY : MRS.ROHINI, JCIT + /DATE OF HEARING : 08.06.2018 + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.06.2018 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : M/S.CARBURETTORS LTD., THE ASSESSEE, FILED THIS MI SCELLANEOUS PETITION AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.209/MD S/2017 DATED 05.09.2017 FOR THE AY 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE PLEADE D THAT IT HAS NOT EARNED ANY EXEMPT INCOME AND HENCE THE DECISION MAD E BY THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH RATIO LAID BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT MP NO.26/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.209/CHNY/2017) :- 2 -: OF MADRAS IN THE CASE OF M/S.REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. , V. ACIT [2017] 392 ITR 633 (MAS). 2. THE LD.AR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PARA NO.3 OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ITA NO.209/MDS/2017 DATED 05.09.2017 FOR THE AY 201 2-13 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE FINDING MADE BY THE TRIBUNAL THA T THE FIRST DISTINGUISHABLE FACT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEI VED DIVIDEND INCOME DURING THIS YEAR, WHILE THE CASE REFERRED BY THE CI T(A), NONE OF THEM RECEIVED DIVIDEND DURING THE YEAR UNDER DISPUTE IS NOT CORRECT. THEREAFTER, HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE SPECIFI C PORTION OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN ITA NO.46/CIT(A)-1/2015-16 DATED 0 1.11.2016 IN PARA NO.7 WHICH IS AS UNDER: SIMILARLY, AS THE APPELLANT HAS NOT EARNED ANY INC OME FROM DIVIDEND FROM ITS INVESTMENTS MADE IN BTACL DURING THE YEAR, NO DISAL LOWANCE CAN BE COMPUTED UNDER RULE 8D. AND SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL ERRED IN ITS CONCL USION IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. PER CONTRA, THE LD.DR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO P ARA NO.3 OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS CLEARLY DISTINGUISHED THE FACTS AND APPLIED THE RATIO OF THE KERALA HIGH COURTS DECISION REPORTED IN 399 ITR 296 (KER). THE LD.DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PITH AND SUBSTANCES OF THE DECISION OF THE ITAT STANDS AFFIR M ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE DECISION REFERRED TO BY THE I TAT IN THE IMPUGNED MP NO.26/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.209/CHNY/2017) :- 3 -: ORDER AND HENCE THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE MA OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. BASED ON THE FINDINGS RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.4,32 ,80,356/-, THE BENCH RAISED A SPECIFIC QUERY WHETHER THIS FACT IS CORREC T OR NOT? AND WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS ANY MATERIAL TO DISPUTE SUCH FACT. TH E LD.AR FILED A COPY OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2012, P&L A/C OF THE ASSE SSEE, STATEMENT OF PROFIT & LOSS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2012 AND NOT E ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2012 WHICH INDIC ATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED OTHER INCOME UNDER SCHEDULE -10 AT RS.49,039,827/-. THE BREAKUP OF SCHEDULE INDICATED THAT THE OTHER INCOME COMPRISED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.4,32,80,356/ -. THEREFORE, THE PREMISE ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE FILED AFFIDAVIT FOR F ILING THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION APPEARS TO BE CONTUMACIOUS. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. SINCE, THE ASSE SSEE HAS RECEIVED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.4,32,80,356/- DURING THE AY, ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SPECIFIED AND THE DECISION RELIED ON BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER ITA NO.209/MDS/2017 DATED 05.09.2017, THE DEC ISION ARRIVED THEREIN IS CORRECT AND THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE MI SCELLANEOUS PETITION. MP NO.26/CHNY/2018 (IN ITA NO.209/CHNY/2017) :- 4 -: 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JUNE 08, 201 8, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: JUNE 08, 2018. TLN + )23 43 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 3 ) /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. % /GF