ORION TRAVELS P. LTD, MUMBAI v. DCIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

ITA 4024/MUM/2011 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2014 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 402419914 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAACO1591K
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4024/MUM/2011
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 11 month(s)
Appellant ORION TRAVELS P. LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent DCIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 16-04-2014
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 16-04-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 26-12-2013
Next Hearing Date 26-12-2013
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 16-05-2011
Judgment Text
C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH MUMBAI .. . . . . BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP AM AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN JM ./ I.T.A. NO.4023 /MUM/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-2005 ./ I.T.A. NO.4024 /MUM/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-2006 M/S ORION TRAVELS PVT. LTD. 32 MADHULI 3 RD FLOOR DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD NEHRU CENTRE WORLI MUMBAI 400 018. / VS. DY . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 31 MUMBAI. ./ PAN :AAACO1591K ( % / APPELLANT ) .. ( &'% / RESPONDENT ) A PPELLANT BY SHRI DHARMESH SHAH RESPONDE NT BY : DR. P. DANIEL * / DATE OF HEARING : 10-04-2014 * / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-04-2014 [ / O R D E R PER P.M. JAGTAP A.M . : .. THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)- 40 MUMBAI BOTH DTD. 28-0 2-2011FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06 INVOLVE A COMMON ISSUE AN D THE SAME THEREFORE HAVE BEEN HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS SINGLE CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH ARE IDE NTICAL IN BOTH THESE APPEALS (EXCEPT AMOUNT IN DISPUTE) READ AS UNDER:- ITA 4023/M/11 & 4024/M/11 2 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS ) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDER U/S. 250 OF THE A CT AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 143(3) RWS 147 OF THE AC T WAS BAD IN LAW AND INVALID. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER ARE INVALID AND HENCE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) RWS 147 OF THE ACT WAS ALSO VOID AB INITIO. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT NO INCOME FRO M ATTACHED ASSETS CAN BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN NOT GRANTING RELIEF OF LIABILITY A MOUNTING TO RS. 9 00 999/- (FOR A.Y. 2005-06 RS. 15 02 966/-) TOWAR DS INTEREST EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. AT THE OUTSET IT IS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS A DE LAY OF 13 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING BOTH THESE APPEALS. IN T HIS REGARD THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY O N THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN RELEASING THE APPEAL FEES BY THE CUS TODIAN. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE TOOK THE INITIATIVE TO ADDRESS THE LET TERS AND REMINDERS TO THE CUSTODIAN FOR THE RELEASE OF THE APPEAL FEES FOR FI LING THE PRESENT APPEALS AND IMMEDIATELY ON RECEIPT OF THE COUNTERFOIL OF THE CH ALLAN THE APPEALS WERE FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE RE WAS A SIMILAR DELAY OF 13 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY T HE OTHER GROUP COMPANY M/S GROWMORE EXPORTS LTD. FOR THE SAME REASON AND T HE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 20-11-2013 PASSED IN ITA NO. 4015/MUM/2 011 AND OTHERS CONDONED THE SAID DELAY. KEEPING IN VIEW THE SAID D ECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND HAVING REGARD TO THE REL EVANT FACTS OF THE CASE WE ITA 4023/M/11 & 4024/M/11 3 CONDONE THE DELAY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FI LING THESE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND PROCEED FURTHER TO DISPOSE OF THE SAID APPEALS ON MERIT. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED GROUND NO. 1 TO 5 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THESE APPEALS. THE S AME ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 5. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 6 OF BOTH THESE APPEALS THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS POINTED OUT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT (A) THAT THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE MADE BY THE A.O. FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLO WING HIS APPELLATE ORDER PASSED IN THE CASE OF SHRI HITESH S. MEHTA. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF SHRI H ITESH S. MEHTA HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISPOSED OF BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS COMMON OR DER DATED 26-4-2013 PASSED IN ITA NO. 7726 & 7727/MUM/2010 WHEREIN A SI MILAR ISSUE RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN SE T ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE PARA 5 OF ITS ORDER WHICH READS AS UNDER:- GROUND NO. 4 RELATES TO THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A ) IN CONFIRMING THE LIABILITIES AMOUNTING TO RS. 11 24 99 052/- AND RS. 12 61 36 245/- RESPECTIVELY FOR THE AYS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 TOWARD S INTEREST EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS PERTINE NT TO NOTE THAT THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN PARA 3.3 ABOVE IN RESPECT OF REJE CTION/RELIABILITY OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE PROPOSED ADJUDICATION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE SAID DIRECTION MAY HAVE DIRECT IMPACT O N THE ISSUE OF THE IMPUGNED LIABILITY. WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE ALSO TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE AFRESH ALONG WITH THE ADJUDICA TION OF THE RESPECTIVE GROUND PERTAINING TO THE REJECTION/RELIABILITY OF T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 6. AS THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ALL THE MATERIAL FACTS RELEVANT THERETO ARE SIMILAR TO THE CASE OF SHRI HITESH S. MEHTA DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THE LD. REPRESENTATI VES OF BOTH THE SIDES HAVE AGREED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE SHOULD ALSO BE SENT BACK TO TH E LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ITA 4023/M/11 & 4024/M/11 4 DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF INTERES T EXPENDITURE AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AS PER THE SAME DIRECTIONS AS GIVEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI HITESH S. MEHTA. GROUND NO. 6 OF BOTH APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACC ORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH APRIL 2014 . * 0 1 16-04-2014 * SD/- SD/- (DR. S.T.M. PAVLAN) (P.M. JAGTAP ) JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 1 DATED 16-4-2014``` [ .../ RK SR. PS ' #%& '& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. % / THE APPELLANT 2. &'% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 4 () / THE CIT(A)40 MUMBAI. 4. 4 / CIT -CENTRAL II MUMBAI 5. 7 &9 9 / DR ITAT MUMBAI B BENCH 6. ; / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER '7 & //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI