ITO 12(2)(1), V. MONIKA INDIA,

MA 651/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9445 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S P GOYAL

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI .., ! ' ' ' ' .'. ! , #$ !, # % BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL, JM AND SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM && # ' ./ MA NO.651/MUM/2010 ( # )*+ , / ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.3360/MUM/2003) ( ' - ' - ' - ' - / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1999-2000) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(2)(1) MUMBAI. M/S.MONIKA INDIA 109, CHURCHGATE CHAMBERS 5 NEW MARINE LINES MUMBAI 400 020. PAN : AABFM6640H. ( # / // / APPLICANT) ' ' ' ' / VS. ( ./01/ RESPONDENT) # 2 22 2 3 # 3 # 3 # 3 # / APPLICANT BY : SHRI MOHIT JAIN ./01 2 3 # 2 3 # 2 3 # 2 3 # / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.P.GOYAL ' 2 +$ / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 05.10.2012 45- 2 +$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : .05.10. 2012 #6 #6 #6 #6 / / / / O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S.254(2) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE REVENUE PRAYING FOR THE RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 24 .03.2010 IN ITA NO.3360/MUM/2003. 2. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDE D THAT THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION IN RELATION TO DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS OF ` 43,56,837. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL, WHILE DECIDING THIS ISSUE MA NO.651/MUM/2010 M/S.MONIKA INDIA. 2 IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR, HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER PASS ED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S.SANJEEV WOOLLEN MILLS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999- 2000. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE IN THE CA SE OF SANJEEV WOOLLEN MILLS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98 WAS RESTOR ED BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DE LETED. IN THE OPPOSITION, SHRI S.P.GOYAL, REPRESENTING THE ASSESS EE RELIED ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS 1999-2000. WHILE DELETING TH E ADDITION, THE TRIBUNAL RELIED ON THE ORDER PASSED IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCERN NAMELY, M/S.SANJEEV WOOLLEN MILLS FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 1999- 2000 ITSELF. IN THIS ORDER THE TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO BY M/S.SANJEEV WOOLLEN MILLS WITH M/S.ANIL ENTERPRISES AND M/S.SOOR AJ HOSIERY WERE ACCEPTED AS GENUINE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINIO N THE RELIANCE OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE TRIB UNAL ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98 IS MISCONCEIVED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT WHEN FOR THE YEAR IN QUESTION SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO BY M/S.SANJEEV WOOLLEN MILLS WITH THE SAME PARTIES HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AS GENUINE, THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION OF RELYING ON THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR AN EARLIER YEAR. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY MISTAKE MUCH LESS THE MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD REQUIRING ANY RECTIFICATION. MA NO.651/MUM/2010 M/S.MONIKA INDIA. 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 05 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012. #6 2 45- 7 '8 5 2 9 SD/- SD/- (B.R.MITTAL) (R.S.SYAL) ! ! ! ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ ! #$ ! #$ ! #$ ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 7 ' DATED : 05 TH OCTOBER, 2012. DEVDAS* #6 2 .+& :#&-+ #6 2 .+& :#&-+ #6 2 .+& :#&-+ #6 2 .+& :#&-+/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. # / THE APPLICANT. 2. ./01 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ; () / THE CIT(A) CENTRAL-VII, MUMBAI. 4. ; / CIT 5. &>9 .+' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9? @ / GUARD FILE. #6' #6' #6' #6' / BY ORDER, /&+ .+ //TRUE COPY// ) ) ) )/ // /A B A B A B A B ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI