DCIT, Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai V. Symantec Software and Services India Private Ltd, , Chennai

MA 62/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4789 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI ... , ! ' # $ , & $' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (( / M.P. NO.62/CHNY/2019 (IN I.T.A. NO.33/CHNY/2018) ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S SYMANTEC SOFTWARE & SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., 1/124, SHIVAJI GARDENS, DLF INFO CITY, 5 TH FLOOR, BLOCK 1C, MOONLIGHT STOP, NANDAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 089. PAN : AAKCS 5422 K (,-) /PETITIONER) (,.-// RESPONDENT) ,-) 1 2 /PETITIONER BY : SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR , ADDL.CIT ,.-/ 1 2 / RESPONDENT BY : NONE 3 1 4& / DATE OF HEARING : 02.08.2019 56* 1 4& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.08.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 05.10.2018. 2 M.P. NO.62/CHNY/19 2. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERV ICE OF NOTICE THROUGH DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOS E THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION ON MERIT. 3. SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, THE LD. DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL CONFIR MED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH REG ARD TO PROVISION SAID TO BE MADE FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION. ACCOR DING TO THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MAD E ONLY A PROVISION AND THERE WAS NO ACTUAL PAYMENT, THEREFOR E, A MERE PROVISION MADE FOR FUTURE CANNOT BE ALLOWED. HOWEV ER, AT PARA 9 ON PAGE 5, IN THE LAST LINE, INSTEAD OF ALLOWING, IT W AS MENTIONED AS DISALLOWED. THIS MAY BE A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. THIS IS OBVIOUS FROM THE HARMONIOUS READING OF PARA 8 & 9. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS T HAT THERE IS A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE LAST LINE OF PARA 9 OF T HE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 05.10.2018. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R., PARAS 8 AND 9 SHALL BE READ HARMONIOUSLY. THIS TRIBUNAL SPECIF ICALLY SAID THAT MERE PROVISION TO MEET THE EXPENDITURE IN FUTURE CA NNOT BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING TAXABLE INCOME. IT WAS ALSO POINTE D OUT THAT IT IS 3 M.P. NO.62/CHNY/19 OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM THE ACTUAL AMOUNT SPE NT. THEREFORE, LAST SENTENCE SHALL BE IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED. HOW EVER, TYPED AS IT CANNOT BE DISALLOWED. THEREFORE, THERE IS AN ERRO R WHICH IS PRIMA FACIE ON RECORD. ACCORDINGLY, IT NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. 5. AT PARA 9, IN THE LAST LINE, THE LAST WORD DISA LLOWED SHALL BE DELETED. INSTEAD THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INSERTED:- ALLOWED . NOW, THE LAST SENTENCE OF PARA 9 SHALL BE READ AS F OLLOWS:- THEREFORE, THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR IS CONCERNED, IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED. 6. THE ERROR POINTED OUT BY THE LD. D.R. IS RECTIFI ED ACCORDINGLY. 7. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE MISCELLANEOUS PE TITION FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 8 TH AUGUST, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (! ' # $ ) ( ... ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANES AN) & / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 8 /DATED, THE 8 TH AUGUST, 2019. KRI. 4 M.P. NO.62/CHNY/19 1 ,49( :(*4 /COPY TO: 1. ,-) / PETITIONER 2. ,.-/ /RESPONDENT 3. 3 ;4 () /CIT(A) 4. 3 ;4 /CIT 5. (< ,4 /DR 6. ) = /GF.