DCIT 10(1)(1), MUMBAI V. KDD INDIA P. LTD, MUMBAI

MA 701/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2871 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAUDHARY ARUN KUMAR SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: LALCHAND CHAU DHARY
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH H, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO.701/MUM /2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.3926/MUM /2018) ASSESSMENT YEA: 2012-13 DCIT, CIRCLE -10(1)(2) ROOM NO. 623, 6 TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN MUMBAI-400 020 VS. KDD(INDIA) PVT.LTD. C/O. REGUS SUBURB CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED LEVEL-4 DYNASTY BUSINESS PARK ANDHERI KURLA ROAD ANDHERI (EAST) MUMBAI-0400 059 PAN: AAADK5691B (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI LALCHAND CHAUDHARY, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI CHAUDHARY ARUN KUMAR SINGH, D. R. DATE OF HEARING : 29.03.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.04 .2019 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, THE REVENUE SEEKS RECALLING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNA L IN THE ITA.NO. 3926/MUM/2016, DATED 17.05.2018. 2. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT THE SAID ORDER WAS PASSED DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVEN UE IN TERMS OF CIRCULAR NO.21/2015 DATED 10/02/2015 WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT WAS STATED TO BE BELOW RS. 10 LACS. THE LD. DR SUBM ITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS ERRONEOUS TO THE EXTEN T THAT THE DISALLOWANCE INVOLVED IN THE GROUND RAISED BY THE R EVENUE WAS RS. 1,21,27,943/- WHICH INCLUDED BRAND BUILDING EXP ENSES AND MA NO.701/M/2018 KDD (INDIA) PVT.LTD. 2 LISTING DISPLAY CHARGES. THUS THE TAX EFFECT INVOLV ED WORKS OUT TO RS. 39,34,911/-. THEREFORE, THE SAID ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL IS APPARENT WRONG AND MAY BE RECALLED. 3. PER CONTRA THE LD. AR ON THE OTHER HAND STRONGLY OBJECTED TO THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE SAID APPEAL WAS ONLY WITH RESPECT TO TREATMENT OF LISTING AND DISPLAY CHARGES AS CAPITA L IN NATURE IN WHICH THE AMOUNT INVOLVED WAS ONLY RS. 5,30,594/-. THEREFORE, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS THE TAX EFFECT WAS BELOW RS. 10 LAC S AND MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE IMPUGNED ORDER AN D ALSO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREIN THE DISALLOWANCE IN RESPEC T OF LISTING AND DISPLAY CHARGES WAS MADE, WE OBSERVE THAT THE D ISALLOWANCE WAS ONLY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 5,30,594/- AND THUS MIS CELLANEOUS APPLICATION BY THE REVENUE DOES NOT HAVE ANY MERIT AND SUBSTANCE AT ALL AND IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ACCORDIN GLY THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 5. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVE NUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.04.2019. SD/- SD/- (C.N.PRASAD) (RAJESH KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED:12.04.2019. * THIRUMALESH, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI MA NO.701/M/2018 KDD (INDIA) PVT.LTD. 3 THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORDER (ASSISTANTREGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI