Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore V. M/s Royal Challengers Sports Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

MA 333/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9243 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B PREMI
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREYA L
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES C BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.333/BANG/2018 (IN ITA NO. 59 /BANG/201 5) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 0 - 11 ) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5(1)(1), BANGALORE . .APPELLANT VS. M/S. ROYAL CHALLENGER SPORTS PVT. LTD. , UB TOWER, 24, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 RESPONDENT. ASSESSEE BY: S MT. SHREYA L, C.A. REVENUE BY: S MT. B. PREMI, JCIT (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 06.12 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 .01 .20 20 O R D E R PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : THIS MISC. PETITION NO.333/BANG/2018 IN ITA NO.59/BANG/2015 FILED BY THE REVENUE CONTENDING THAT CERTAIN APPARENT MISTAKES IN THE ORDER AND SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. 2 M P N O. 333/BANG/2018 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE MISC. PETITION, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE AGREEMENT WITH KARNATAKA STATE CRI CKET ASSOCIATION (KSCA) IS DT.14.09.2011 WHICH IS MUCH AFTER THE END OF THE RELEVANT YEAR I.E. F.Y. 2009 - 10 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AND THIS ASPECT HAS BEEN OVER LOOKED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL I N THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THEREFORE IT IS AN APPARENT MISTAKE WHICH SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. 3. WHEREAS THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESS MENT ORDER NOTED THAT THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION IS THE DATE MUCH AFTER AND RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. 2010 - 11 . B UT EVEN AFTER NOTING TH ESE FACTS , THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE LIABILITY IN QUESTION AND THE AMOUNT OF RS.45 LAKHS HAS BEEN PAID BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE RELEVANT FY AND THEREFORE THE LIABILITY OF THIS PAYMENT WAS EXAMINED NOTWITHSTANDING THE DATE OF AGREEMENT AND THE FACTS ARE CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ORDER AND IT CANNOT BE SAID AS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECOR D AND FILED SUBMISSIONS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE CONSIDER PROPER TO PLACE OBJECTI ONS IN THE MISC. PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE WHICH ARE READ AS UNDER : 3 M P N O. 333/BANG/2018 T HE MISC. PETITION I S FILED AS THE D ATE OF AGREEMENT WITH KARNATAKA STATE CRICKET ASSOCIATION (KSCA) IS DT.14.09.2011 WHICH IS MUCH LATER TO THE FY 2009 - 10 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 AND THEREFORE THERE IS APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER BECAUSE THIS ASPECT WAS NOT DEALT BY T HE TRIBUNAL. BEFORE TAKING ANY DECISION ON THIS ASPECT, WE FEEL IT PROPER TO PRODUCE RELEVANT PORTION FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS TO WHETHER THE BASIS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICERS DECISION THAT THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION IS OF DATE AFTER THE END OF THE RELE VANT ACCOUNTING YEAR. FOR THIS PURPOSE, WE REPRODUCE THE FOLLOWING PARA FROM PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER : 4 M P N O. 333/BANG/2018 5 M P N O. 333/BANG/2018 AS PER THE RELEVANT PARA OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REPRODUCED ABOVE, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS FACT IS VERY MUCH NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE DATE OF AGREEMENT ITSELF IS NOT IN THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASST. YEAR IN QUESTION. BUT EVEN AFTER NOTING THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER, A D D I T I O N WAS NOT MADE BY HIM ON THE B A S I S O F DATE OF AGREEMENT BUT ON TH E BASIS T H A T THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION IS CAPITAL IN NATU RE. HENCE THE CONTENTION RAISED IN THE PRESENT M.P. THAT THERE IS APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER BECAUSE THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE DATE OF AGREEMENT IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO M ISTAKE APPARENT IN THE TRIBUNAL ORDER ON THIS ASPECT. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 T H JAN ., 20 20 . S D / - S D / - (A.K. GARODIA) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER 6 M P N O. 333/BANG/2018 COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE