DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(3)(2), MUMBAI V. VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LIMITED , MUMBAI

MA 779/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6635 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V JANARDHNANAN
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'K' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 779/MUM/2017 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1310/MUM/2016) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) D C I T - 3(3)(2) ROOM NO. 609, 6TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI 400020 VS. M/S. VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. 171-C, MITTAL COURT NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 400021 PAN AABCV4012H APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY: SHRI V. JANARDHNANAN RESPONDENT BY: SHRI BHUPENDRA KARKHANIS DATE OF HEARING: 04.05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07.05.2018 O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, AM THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE DEPA RTMENT ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 24.02.2017 FOR A.Y. 2011-12. 2. THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE LEARNED D.R. CONTENDS THAT THE ITAT HAS NOT REFERRED TO ANY SPECIFIC DEC ISION WHILE ADJUDICATING ON THE ISSUE OF SECTION 14A R.W RULE 8D(2)(III) BUT HAS SIMPLY STATED THAT IT IS FOLLOWING THE COORDINATE DECISIONS AS RELIED UPO N BEFORE IT. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC DECISION OR JUDICIAL PRECED ENCE, ON WHICH THE TAT PLACED ITS REFERENCE, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO TAKE AN Y FURTHER COURSE OF ACTION AS TO WHETHER THE DECISION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS T O BE ACCEPTED OR NOT. THE ITAT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN SPECIFIC CASE LAW/DECISION O N THE ISSUE OF RULE 8D(2)(III), AS THERE ARE SEVERAL DECISIONS BOTH IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, BEING SILENT ON THIS ISSUE, NEEDS A RECONSIDERATION BY IT FOR ISSUING SPECIFIC FINDINGS AND PLACING MA NO. 779/MUM/2017 M/S. VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. 2 RELIANCE ON SUITABLE CASE LAWS OR DECISION IN SUPPO RT OF ITS PRESENT DECISION IN ALLOWING ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL AND FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS DEALT WITH THE ISSUE THREADBA RE AFTER GIVING SO MANY JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION THAT RESULTED DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION RULE 8D(2)(III). ACCORDI NGLY, THERE IS NO MISTAKE, MUCH LESS THAN AN APPARENT MISTAKE, IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED D.R. ALSO FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT SO MANY JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS HAVE BEEN REFERRED BY THE BENCH WHIL E DECIDING THE ISSUE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH MAY, 2018. SD/ - SD / - (MAHAVIR SINGH) (R.C. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 7 TH MAY, 2018 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT - CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. THE DR, K BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.