M/s. Lucky Valley Investments & Holdings Limited, Bangalore v. ACIT, Ooty

ITA 1283/CHNY/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 128321714 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACL8025F
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 1283/CHNY/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Lucky Valley Investments & Holdings Limited, Bangalore
Respondent ACIT, Ooty
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 11-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-01-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 12-08-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH B BEFORE DR.O.K.NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1283/MDS/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S LUCKY VALLEY INVESTMENTS & HOLDINGS LIMITED NO. 26/1 SUA HOUSE KASTURBA CROSS ROAD BANGALORE 560 001. VS. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE I(1) OOTY PAN AAACL 8025 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI P.B. SEKHARAN ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEV ANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2006-07. THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I AT ITA NO. 1283/MDS/2009 :- 2 -: COIMBATORE DATED 08.06.2009 AND ARISES OUT OF THE A SSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APP EAL IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELING EXPENSES. TH E DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELING EXPENSES IS MODIFIED TO ` 60 000/-. 3. SECOND GROUND IS AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 4. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE EARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ENHANCED THE DISALLOWAN CE BY APPLYING RULE 8D OF THE I.T. RULES 1961 WHICH IS NOT APPLICABLE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. WE FIND THAT DE HORS OF APPLICATION OF RULE 8D DE FACTO SPEAKING THE NOMI NAL ENHANCEMENT BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPE ALS) IS JUSTIFIED. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ENHA NCEMENT HAS BEEN MADE WITHOUT NOTICE IS NOT CORRECT. THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS MADE ENHANCEMENT ONLY AFTE R PROPER NOTICE. CONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS OF THE CASE W E MODIFY THE DISALLOWANCE DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX (APPEALS) TO ` 1.5 LAKHS. ITA NO. 1283/MDS/2009 :- 3 -: 5. WITH THIS MODIFICATION THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE IS DISPOSED OF TREATING IT AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TUESDAY 11 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI : 11 TH JANUARY 2011 VL. COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR