DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI V. SHRIRAM PROPERTIES PVT LTD., CHENNAI

MA 39/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3088 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2022
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GOWTHAM
• Section: 54

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ ’’ ’ यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI ी महावीर सह, उपा य एवं ी मनोज कुमार अ वाल, लेखा सद य के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A No.39/Chny/2020 (Arising out of ITA No.1429/Chny/2019) िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai. Vs. M/s. Shriram Properties Pvt. Ltd., Greams Dugar, 4 th & 5 th Floor, 149, Greams road, Chennai – 600 006. [PAN: AAFCS-5801-D] ( अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri Gowtham, Advocate थ की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26.08.2022 घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President : By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue has moved for rectification of the Tribunal’s order passed in ITA No.1429/Chny/2019 vide order dated 24.09.2019 for Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Ld. Sr. D.R stated that the Tribunal has dismissed Revenue’s appeal by following the CBDT Circular No.17/2019 in F. MA No.39/Chny/2020 :- 2 -: No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ(Pt) dated 8 th August, 2019, wherein the tax effect is below the prescribed limit. But, pointed out that the Revenue’s appeal does fall under this Circular, because it falls under clause 10(c) of the Circular, wherein the Revenue has framed assessed in view of revenue audit objection. But, the Ld. Sr. D.R could not produce that there is any revenue audit objection raised in this case and in the absence of the same, the order of the Tribunal does not suffer from any mistake apparent from record and hence, the Miscellaneous Petition moved by the Revenue is dismissed. For this, we are relying on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ms. Prabha Dixit in Tax Case Appeal No.641 of 2017 dated 12.12.2017 (Mad.). This issue is also covered by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court, wherein in the absence of evidence of any audit objection, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. The Hon’ble Madras High Court held as under: 4. The Tribunal took up for consideration the factual issue and found that there was no material produced before the Tribunal to establish that the audit objections were accepted by the Department. If such a factual finding has been rendered by the Tribunal, the same cannot be disturbed in exercise of powers under Section 26oA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.Janardhana Rao Vs. Jt. CIT [reported in (2005) 273 ITR 50. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of DIT (International Taxation) Vs. Mrs.Jennifer Bhide [reported in (2012) 349 ITR 80], referred to by the Tribunal, is not applicable to the MA No.39/Chny/2020 :- 3 -: facts of this case and the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Jain Narain Vs. ITO [reported in (2008) 306 ITR 335] would be applicable. 6. However, we find that this Court, in the case of CIT Vs. V.Natarajan [reported in (2006) 287 ITR 271], while considering a similar issue with regard to exemption under Section 54 of the said Act, held in favour of the assessee and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. On a reading of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal has not gone into the aspects regarding the applicability of the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Mrs. Jennifer Bhide, but only noted the findings rendered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Thus, we are satisfied that on facts, the Revenue was not able to establish before the Tribunal that the audit objections were accepted by the Department. 4. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ms. Prabha Dixit, supra, we dismiss this Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue. 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26 th August, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- ( मनोज मनोजमनोज मनोज कुमार कुमारकुमार कुमार अ वाल अ वालअ वाल अ वाल) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) लेखा लेखालेखा लेखा सद य सद यसद य सद य /Accountant Member (महावीर िसंह) (Mahavir Singh) उपा / Vice President चे ई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 26 th August, 2022. EDN/- आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF