THE PR CIT-2, AGRA V. M/S SHANTI CONSTRUCTION , JHANSI

MA 22/AGR/2020

AI Insights

The case involves a dispute between the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT), Circle 2(3)(1), Jhansi, and M/s. Shanti Constructions, Stone Crushing Unit, Goramachia, Badagaon, Jhansi, concerning the permissible deduction against remuneration to partners under section 40(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The revenue filed a miscellaneous application claiming that the Tribunal erred in its previous decision by allowing a deduction of Rs. 28,60,000, which exceeded the Rs. 13,80,000 permissible under the partnership deed. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and the partnership deed, found no error in its previous ruling and dismissed the application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772344 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHIB P. SATSANGEE
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 22/Agr/2020 (in ITA No.58/Agr/2016) Assessment year : 2011-12 DCIT, Circle 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. M/s. Shanti Constructions, Stone Crushing Unit, Goramachia, Badagaon, Jhansi. PAN : ABIFS1084M (Applicant) (Opposite Party) ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This miscellaneous application has been moved on behalf of the revenue, stating that the Tribunal, while passing order dated 19.08.2019 in ITA No. 58/Agr/2016, erred in deciding the excess claim of deduction against remuneration to the partners u/s. 40(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), wherein the Assessing Officer had allowed deduction of full claim of Rs.28,60,000/- as against Rs.13,80,000/- permissible under the partnership deed. Prayed to recall the impugned order Assessee by Sh. Sahib P. Satsangee, C.A. Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of hearing 18.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 27.08.2025 Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 22/Agr/2020 2 | P a g e dated 19.08.2019 for rectifying the mistake apparent from the record and decide the issue on merit afresh. 2. Perused the records. Heard learned Sr. DR for the applicant revenue and learned representative for the opposite party/assessee. 3. Perusal of the record shows that impugned order dated 19.08.2019 has been passed in detail, comprising 17 pages. The Tribunal has specifically referred the submissions of assessee’s representation at para 15 of the impugned order, wherein the remuneration of all the seven partners have been reproduced from page 12 of the assessee’s paper book, whose total remuneration comes to Rs.28,60,000/- only on the basis of supplementary partnership deed. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly held that PCIT failed to make necessary enquiries while examining the order dated 28.03.2016 passed u/s. 263 of the Act by Ld. PCIT-2, Agra. The finding is based on merit. There does not appear any mistake apparent from the record. Accordingly, application is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. 4. In the result, miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27.08.2025 *aks/- Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 22/Agr/2020 3 | P a g e Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "