M/s Parkkot Maritima Agencies Private Limited., Vasco V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Panaji., Panaji

MA 48/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3915 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S SUNDARESAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T N SEETHARAMAN
• Section: 10; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO S . 47 & 48 /PNJ/201 5 (ITA NOS. 199 & 200/PNJ/2015) (ASST. YEAR S : 20 1 0 - 1 1 & 2011 - 12 ) M/S. PARKKOT MARITIMA AGENCIES (P) LTD., PARKKOT HOUSE, VASCO - DA - GAMA, GOA. VS. D CIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI GOA. PAN NO. AADCP 1208 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI T.N. SEETHARAMAN ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : DR. S. SUNDARESAN - D R DATE OF HEARING : 21 / 0 1 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 1 / 0 1 /201 6 . O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER TH E S E ARE TWO MISC. APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A.NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 DATED 12 /0 8 /201 5 . 2. SHRI T.N. SEETHARAMAN, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND DR. S. SUNDARESAN, DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3 . IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN OTHER CASES AS ALSO THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF CIT - 17 VS. M/S. WESTERN INDIA MARINA CORPORATION IN I.T.A.NO. 3566/2010 DATED 01/04/2014 , WHEREIN THE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF THE 2 MA NO S . 47 & 48 /PNJ/201 5 SPEED MONEY PAID TO THE PORT WORKERS W AS RESTRICTED TO 25%. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS LIABLE TO THE RECTIFIED. 4 . IN REPLY , DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AT THE OUTSET, IT MUST BE MENTIONED HERE THAT THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY FACTUAL ERROR IN THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE APPLICABILITY OF CASE - LAWS ARE AFTER THE DETERMINATION OF THE FACTS IN EACH CASE. THE TRIBUNAL HAS SPECIFICALLY GIVEN A FINDING THAT SPEED MONEY AMOU NTS HAD BEEN PAID WITHOUT DEDUCTING TDS AND THE DETAILS OF THE PAYMENTS AS TO WHO HAS BEEN PAID A N D HOW MUCH HAS NOT BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALS O BEEN UNABLE TO PROVE THAT THE AMOUNTS HAD BEEN DISBURSED IN THE COURSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE OR FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE . WHETHER THE SAID PAYMENTS THEMSELVES WERE SPEED MONEY HAS BEEN DOUBTED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THIS BEING SO, THE FACTS BEING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF M/S. WESTERN INDIA MARINA CORPORATION (SUPRA) DECIDED BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT AND AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO POINT OUT ANY SPECIFIC ERROR APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THE MISC. APPLICATION S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ILL - CONCEIVED AND STAND DISMISSED. 6 . IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPL I CATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THURSDAY , THE 2 1 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 201 6 AT GOA . S D / - S D / - (N.S.SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 1 TH JANUARY , 201 6 . 3 MA NO S . 47 & 48 /PNJ/201 5 VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE. 2 . THE REVENUE. 3 . THE CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R . 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI .