ACIT OSD 2(2), MUMBAI v. JOGANI CONSTRUCTION LTD, MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES J MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL AM AND SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN JM ITA NO.1419/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2000-2001 THE ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX OSD CIRCLE 2(2) MUMBAI. VS. M/S.JOGANI CONSTRUCTION LIMITED 301 GUNDECHA CHAMBERS 140 N.M.ROAD FORT MUMBAI 400 001. PA NO.AAACJ1100D. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.K.BHALODIA RESPONDENT BY : --- NONE --- O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON 17.12.2008 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-2001. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.94 31 538 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER U/S.36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE PR OCEEDING TO DISPOSE OFF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. BRIEFLY STATED THE F ACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS AS BUILDER AND DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY AT THE RELEVANT TIME. IT CLAIMED DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.1 05 68 838 U/S.36(1)(III) OF THE A CT. OUT OF THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE AFORE STATED ADDITION ON THE GROU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE PROPORTIONATE FINANCE CHARGES ATTRIBUTA BLE TO DIFFERENT PROJECTS. THE ITA NO.1419/MUM/2009 M/S.JOGANI CONSTRUCTION LIMITED. 2 LEARNED CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE T RIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER YEARS DELETED THE SAID ADDITION. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COU LD NOT POINT OUT ANY DISTINGUISHING FEATURE IN THE FACTS OF THIS YEAR VI S--VIS EARLIER YEARS. HE FURTHER FAILED TO PLACE ON RECORD ANY MATERIAL TO DEMONSTRA TE THAT ANY OF THE SAID ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS BEEN MODIFIED OR REVERSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WE UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY ON THIS ISSUES. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- (N.V.VASUDEVAN) ( R.S.SYAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER MUMBAI : 28 TH JANUARY 2010. DEVDAS* COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-II MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI. ITA NO.1419/MUM/2009 M/S.JOGANI CONSTRUCTION LIMITED. 3 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 28.01.2010 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 28.01.2010 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *