JCIT (OSD) CC 39, MUMBAI v. N. JAMNADAS & CO, MUMBAI

ITA 4300/MUM/2012 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 430019914 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AACFN8427G
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4300/MUM/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant JCIT (OSD) CC 39, MUMBAI
Respondent N. JAMNADAS & CO, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 23-07-2013
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 21-06-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH MUM BAI .. ! #$ # % BEFORE SHRI B. R. MITTAL JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA AM ./ I.T.A. NO.4300/MUM/2012 ( ' ( )( ' ( )( ' ( )( ' ( )( / / / / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) ASST. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-39 ROOM NO.32(1) GROUND FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN M. K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020 ' ' ' ' / VS. N. JAMNADAS & CO. 16 BANK STREET FORT MUMBAI-400 001 * #$ ./ + ./ PAN/GIR NO. AACFN 8427 G ( * / APPELLANT ) : ( -.* / RESPONDENT ) * / # / APPELLANT BY : SHRI O. P. SINGH -.* 0 / # / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI Y. P. TRIVDEI & MS. USHA DALAL ' 0 12$ / // / DATE OF HEARING : 23.07.2013 3 ) 0 12$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.07.2013 #4 / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA A. M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGITATING THE ORDE R BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-41 MUMBAI (CIT(A) FOR SHORT ) DATED 30.04.2012 PARTLY ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL CONTESTING ITS ASSES SMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR (A.Y.) 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 28.12.2011. 2 ITA NO.4300/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) ASST. CIT VS. N. JAMNADAS & CO. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET IT WAS CLAIMED BY THE LD. AR THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL THAT THE SOLE ISSUE ARISING IN THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS S QUARELY COVERED BY A SERIES OF ORDERS BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS OWN CASE AND WHICH STAND AD DUCED AT PGS.1 TO 22 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER-BOOK ENCLOSING FIVE ORDERS FOR PRECEDING YEA RS. HE WOULD THEN TAKE US SERIALLY TO EACH OF THE FIVE ORDERS ON THE SAID PAGES WHILE TH E SIXTH ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL BEING ADDUCED IS QUA J. M. BAXI & CO. (IN ITA NO.5606/MUM/2011 & 5316/MUM/2011 DATED 11.07.2012) WHERE SIMILARLY THE DEPARTMENTS APPE AL ON THE SAME ISSUE STANDS DISMISSED. THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS AN APPROVED CLEARIN G AND FORWARDING AGENT FOR SEA AND AIR CARGO APPROVED BOTH BY INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (IATA) AND CUSTOM HOUSE AGENCIES ASSOCIATION (CHAA). ITS ACTIVITIES A RE CARRIED ON A JOB TO JOB BASIS RAISING THE CHARGES ON ITS CLIENTS EVEN AS IT ALSO EARNS BROKERAGE IN SOME CASES. ALL THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CLIEN TS IS REIMBURSED. ONE OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE COURSE OF ITS ACTIVITIES IS IN RESP ECT OF MISCELLANEOUS/SUNDRY EXPENSES ALSO EUPHEMISTICALLY TERMED AS SPEED MONEY PAID TO TH E WORKERS AT THE DOCK PER SELF-MADE CASH VOUCHERS. THE REVENUE HAS BEEN DISALLOWING THE SAME ON ACCOUNT OF THE SAME BEING UNSUPPORTED BY ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE BESIDES CL AIMING SUCH EXPENSES TO BE ILLEGAL. THE TRIBUNAL HAS TAKEN A CONSISTENT STAND IN THE MA TTER RESTRICTING THE DISALLOWANCE TO 25% OF THE PAYMENTS CLAIMED TO BE MADE TO PORT EMPL OYEES DOCK STAFF ETC. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BEING THE SAME A SIM ILAR VIEW WAS PRAYED FOR BEING ADOPTED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR AS WELL. THE LD. DR CO ULD NOT STATE OF ANY CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR I.E. VIS- -VIS THE PRECEDING YEARS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ORDERS BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS OWN CASE FOR A .YS. 1997-98 AND 1998-99 AND THEN AGAIN FROM A.Y. 2002-03 ONWARDS UP TO THE IMMEDIATE LY PRECEDING YEAR I.E. A.Y. 2008- 09 AT PGS.1 TO 22 OF ITS PAPER-BOOK. THE TRIBUNAL HAS AFTER CONSIDERING BOTH THE ASPECTS OF THE REVENUES CASE CONSISTENTLY ALLOWED THE ASSESS EES CLAIM QUA THE IMPUGNED EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF 75% THEREOF CONFIRMING THE DISALL OWANCE OF THE BALANCE 25%. THE SAID PERCENTAGE IT MAY BE APPRECIATED COULD BE DISTURB ED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SOME FINDING OR 3 ITA NO.4300/MUM/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) ASST. CIT VS. N. JAMNADAS & CO. DISTINGUISHING FEATURE VIZ. THE EXPENDITURE FOR TH E CURRENT YEAR BEING PERCEPTIBLY HIGHER BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. NO DISTINGUISHING FEATURE HAVING BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE REVENUE WE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME D ECIDED LIKEWISE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS IN FACT ALSO ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM TO THAT E XTENT FOLLOWING THE ORDER/S BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE VIDE PARA 2.4 OF HIS ORDER. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . 5 16 0 $5 0 1 78 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 23 2013 SD/- SD/- (B. R. MITTAL) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 9' DATED : 23.07.2013 .'../ ROSHANI SR. PS #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1 #4 0 -1: ;#:)1/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. * / THE APPELLANT 2. -.* / THE RESPONDENT 3. < ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. < / CIT CONCERNED 5. :?@ -1' / DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. @A( B / GUARD FILE #4' #4' #4' #4' / BY ORDER C CC C/ // /7 7 7 7 (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI