ITO 8(2)(3), MUMBAI v. MOONRISE ENGG. ( BOM) P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1193/MUM/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 119319914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AADCM2180R
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1193/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant ITO 8(2)(3), MUMBAI
Respondent MOONRISE ENGG. ( BOM) P.LTD, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 19-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted J
Tribunal Order Date 19-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 19-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 19-01-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 15-02-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI R.V.EASWAR PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.1192 & 1193/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2003-04 & 200 4-05) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-8(2)(3) R.NO.212 AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI-400 020. VS. M/S.MOONRISE ENGG.(BOM)P.LTD. PRATEEKSHA NORTH SOUTH ROAD 10 JVPD SCHEME MUMBAI-400 049. PAN:AADCM2180R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MRS. KUSUM INGLE CIT DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI STANY SALDANHA O R D E R PER R.V.EASWAR PRESIDENT: THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT RELATE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 A ND 2004- 05. THE COMMON GROUND IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN D ELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.25 LAKHS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 3-04 AND RS.2 51 25 000/-FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 MAD E ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND RECEIVED FROM M/S. LOTUS INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 2. AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING THE LEARNED REPRESEN TATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 IN ITA NO.4533/MUM/2009 DATED 28 TH MAY 2010 IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN WHICH A SIMILAR GROUN D HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE MAIN GROUND ON WHICH THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IS THAT M/S. LOT US INVESTMENT PVT.LTD. IS NOT A SHAREHOLDER OF THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY AND THEREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(2 2)(E) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT CANNOT BE INVOKED IN THE ASSESSEES CASE. THE FACTUAL POSITION REMAINS THE SAME FOR THE YEARS UND ER APPEAL. THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ITA NO.1192 & 1193/MUM/10 2 ASSESSEES OWN CASE WE AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) FOR BOTH THE YEARS AND DISMISS THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE. WE MAY ADD THAT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 THE TRIBUNAL HAS APPLIED THE ORDER OF THE SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. BHAUMIK COLOUR PVT.LT D. (2009) 27 SOT 270. THE APPEALS ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED W ITH NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 1 9 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2011. SD/- ( B.RAMAKOTAIAH ) SD/- ( R.V.EASWAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PRESIDENT MUMBAI DATED 19 TH JANUARY 2011. SOMU COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-8 MUMBAI. 4. THE CIT(A)-17 MUMBAI 5. THE DR J BENCH /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDE R ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T MUMBAI