The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam v. M/s The Jeypore Sugars Company Ltd., Chagallu

ITA 269/VIZ/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 26925314 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACT9942R
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number ITA 269/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam
Respondent M/s The Jeypore Sugars Company Ltd., Chagallu
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 02-12-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 02-12-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 30-11-2010
Next Hearing Date 30-11-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 29-04-2010
Judgment Text
ITA NO.269 OF 2010 JEYPORE SUGAR COMPANY LTD CHAGALLU PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 269/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 VISAKHAPATNAM VS. THE JEYPORE SUGARS COMPANY LTD. CHAGALLU (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO:AAACT 9942 R APPELLANT BY: SHRI T.L. PETER DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI CA ORDER PER SHRI B. R. BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.2.2010 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) VISAKHAPATNAM A ND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE SOLE ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL IS WHETHER T HE LEARNED CIT (A) IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE SUM OF RS.54 23 721/- BE ING THE DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT LOSS BROUGHT FORWARD FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04-05. 3. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE SAID ISSUE ARE STATED IN BRIEF. WHILE DETERMINING THE TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2005-06 THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED ABOVE SAID SUM OF RS.54 23 721/- UNDER THE HEAD EXCESS LOSS CLAIMED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. THE LEARNED CIT (A) DELETED THE SAID ADDITION WITH THE REASONING THAT T HE REMEDY AVAILABLE TO ITA NO.269 OF 2010 JEYPORE SUGAR COMPANY LTD CHAGALLU PAGE 2 OF 3 THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS TO RECTIFY THE SAID MISTAK E IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. HENCE THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E US. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE EXPLAINE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INITIALLY SET OFF THE UNABSORBED LOSS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AT RS.17.09 CRORES AGAINST THE INCOME OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE LOSS WAS DETERMINED AT RS.16.55 CRORES AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO SET OFF ONLY A S UM OF RS.16.55 CRORES AGAINST THE INCOME OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HENCE IT HAS RESULTED IN A EXCESS SET OFF OF RS.54 23 721/- CITED ABOVE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER STARTED TO COMPUTE THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION TREATING THE INCOME RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS REVISED RETURN OF INCOME AS THE STARTING POINT HE WAS CONSTRAINED TO ADD TH E ABOVE SAID DIFFERENCE OF RS.54 23 721/-. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. 5. THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO SET OFF THE UNABSORBED LOSS THAT WAS BROUGHT FOR WARD FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LOSS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2004-05 WAS ASSESSED AT A LOWER FIGURE THAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO SET OFF THE UNABSORBED LOSS SO REDUCED. THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE P ARTIES ON THIS POINT ALSO. HOWEVER ON A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WE N OTICE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT GIVEN THE DETAILS OF AMOU NT OF UNABSORBED LOSS THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SET OFF BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REVISED RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-0 5 WHEREIN THE LOSS WAS INITIALLY DETERMINED IS ALSO NOT AVAILABLE ON R ECORD. IN VIEW OF THE ITA NO.269 OF 2010 JEYPORE SUGAR COMPANY LTD CHAGALLU PAGE 3 OF 3 ABOVE WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO SET OFF THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF UNABSORB ED LOSS THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS TREAT ED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND DECEMBER 2010. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (B R BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATE:02-12-2010 COPY TO 1 THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 VISAKHAPATNAM 2 M/S THE JEYPORE SUGARS COMPANY LTD. NO.6-69 CHAG ALLU WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3 4. THE CIT CENTRAL HYDERABAD THE CIT(A) VISAKHAPATNAM 5 THE DR ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM