ACIT, Madurai V. M/s. Susee Auto (Firm), Tirunelveli

MA 32/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7998 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAJI P JACOB IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Rectification of order
• Section: 37

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.32(MDS)/2012 IN ITA NO.1411(MDS)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2003-04 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE III, MADURAI. VS. M/S.SUSEE AUTO (FIRM), 184/2, TRIVANDRUM ROAD, TIRUNELVELI. PAN AAKFS6766R. (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI SHAJI P J ACOB, IRS, CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.BASKAR, ADVO CATE DATE OF HEARING : 18 TH MAY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 TH MAY, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS IN THE NATURE OF REC TIFICATION PETITION. THIS PETITION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE REVENUE - - MP NO.32 OF 2012 2 SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKES APPARENT IN THE ORD ER OF THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B-BENCH, CHENNAI, PA SSED IN ITA NO.1411(MDS)/2010 ON 8-8-2011. 2. IT IS NECESSARY TO EXTRACT THE FULL TEXT OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE TO APPRECIATE THE NATURE OF MI STAKE APPARENT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AS UNDER:- THE HONBLE ITAT HAS PASSED THE ABOVE ORDER ON APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-II, MADURAI DATED 21-4-2010. THE ISSUES DECIDED BY THE CIT(A) VIDE THE ABOVE ORDER ARE THE FOLLOWING: 1. THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION TOWARDS EXCESS AMOUNT COLLECTED AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION ` 533680. 2. THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION TOWARDS PRE DELIVERY EXPENSES ` 122939. 3. THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 37 ` 603820. - - MP NO.32 OF 2012 3 4. THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS COMPLIMENT EXPENSES ` 34676. 5. THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION MADE AS NON BUSINESS EXPENSES ` 5802823. 6. THE CIT(A) HAD CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS TOUR EXPENSES ` 30000. A DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL WAS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-II, MADURAI BEFORE THE ITAT ON 26.8.2010, IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES (1), (3), (4) & (5). ON APPEAL, THE HONBLE ITAT HAS PASSED THE ORDER IN ITA NO.1411(MDS)/2010 DATED 8-8-2011 DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE CONSIDERING ONLY THE FOLLOWING TWO GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE. (I)THE FIRST GROUND REGARDING THE DELETION BY THE CIT(A) RELATING TO EXCESS AMOUNT COLLECTED AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION 533680. (II)THE SECOND GROUND REGARDING THE RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A) IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 37 ( ` 603820) AND COMPLIMENTARY EXPENSES ( ` 34676) - - MP NO.32 OF 2012 4 WHILE DISMISSING THE APPEAL, THE HONBLE ITAT HELD THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN THE LIGHT OF THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, CHENNA BENCHES FOR THE EARLIER YEARS IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, SINCE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES BEING SIMILAR. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE PRESENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED TO RECTIFY THE APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS I N THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE ITAT. 1. DISALLOWANCE U/S 37 : ` 603820/- THIS ISSUE IS DISCUSSED BY THE CIT(A) IN PARA 9 TO 9.2 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER. THE HONBLE TRIBUNALS FINDING THAT THE CIT(A) RELIED ON ITAT ORDER FOR EARLIER YEARS IS NOT CORRECT. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS DATED 21-4-2010. THE ITAT ORDER FOR ASST.YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03 &2004-05 IS DATED 1-4-2011. 2. COMPLIMENTARY EXPENSES : ` 34676 THIS ISSUE WAS NOT DEALT IN THE ITAT ORDER FOR EARLIER YEARS AND THE CIT(A) HADNOT RELIED ON ANY ITAT ORDER WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION. HENCE, THE DECISION OF THE ITAT THAT THE CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION IN THE LIGHT OF THE EARLIER ORDERS PAS SED IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IS FACTUALLY ERRONEOUS. - - MP NO.32 OF 2012 5 3. BON BUSINESS EXPENSES : ` 5802823/- THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL VIDE GROUNDS 3(A) TO 3(C) HAS NOT BEEN ADJUDICATED BY THE ITAT. 3. ON HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE FIND THAT THERE ARE MISTAKES IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AS POINTED O UT BY THE REVENUE. IT IS NECESSARY TO RECTIFY THOSE MISTAKES . WE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED CERTAIN GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE AND IN RE SPECT OF THOSE GROUNDS CONSIDERED WE HAVE MADE SOME WRONG REFERENCES ALSO. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE RECALL OUR ORDER PASSED ON 8-8-2011. 4. THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD DE NOVO. 5. THE APPEAL IS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 6 TH JUNE, 2012. 6. IN RESULT, THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. - - MP NO.32 OF 2012 6 ORDERS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME O F HEARING ON FRIDAY, THE 18 TH OF MAY, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED, THE 18 TH MAY, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.