SAM HOTELIERS AND RESORTS P. LTD, MUMBAI v. ACIT CIR 1(3), MUMBAI

ITA 52/MUM/2012 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2013 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 5219914 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAACS5213L
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 52/MUM/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant SAM HOTELIERS AND RESORTS P. LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent ACIT CIR 1(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 10-07-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted E
Tribunal Order Date 10-07-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 10-07-2013
Next Hearing Date 10-07-2013
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 03-01-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E MUMBAI . . . !' # $ BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JM AND SHRI N.K. BILLA IYA AM . / ITA NO.52/MUM/2012 % % % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 M/S. SAM HOTELLIERS AND RESORTS PVT. LTD. 402 DALAMAL CHAMBERS NEW MARINE LINES MUMBAI - 400 071. / VS. THE ACIT CIR. 1(3) AAYKAR BHAVAN R.NO.564 MK ROAD MUMBAI 400020. & # ./ '( ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAACS 5213L ( &) / APPELLANT ) .. ( *+&) / RESPONDENT ) &) / APPELLANT BY: NONE *+&) - / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR - .# / DATE OF HEARING : 10/07/2013 /0% - .# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10/07/2013 1 / O R D E R PER I.P.BANSAL J.M: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-2 MUMBAI DATED 12/10/2011 FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08. GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE TH E LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2 MUMBAI ERRED IN LAW IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.4 62 850/- MADE U/S.14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND ALTER CHA NGE MODIFY AND/OR ADD TO THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL. . / ITA NO.52/MUM/2012 % % % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 2 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 10/7/2012. HOWEVER NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEARING. AS APPEAL IS SMALL WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL EX-PARTE QU A THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED EXEMPTED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.29 38 844/-. A SUM OF RS.27 684/- WAS ADDED BACK BY THE ASSESSEE BEING ATTRIBUTABLE TO EARNING EXEMPTED INCOME. THE AO APPLIED RULE-8D A ND COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE AT A SUM OF RS.8 59 021/-. HOWEVER T HE SAID DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN RESTRICTED TO AN AMOUNT OF RS.4 90 534/- BY TH E AO ON THE GROUND THAT TOTAL EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE AMOU NTING TO RS.4 90 534/-. LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE EVEN AFTER R EFERRING TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ & B OYCE MFG. COMPANY LTD. VS. DCIT 328 ITR 81(BOM). 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR ON THIS ISSUE. WE FIND THA T THOUGH LD. CIT(A) HAS REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. COMPANY LTD. (SUPRA) IN WHICH IT HAS BE EN HELD THAT RULE 8D WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE TO ASSESSMENT YEARS PRIOR TO A.Y 2008 -09 BUT HE HAS SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE. IN THE SAID DECISION IT HAS BEEN HEL D THAT THE EXPENDITURE WHICH HAVE BEEN INCURRED IN RELATION TO EARNING OF EXEMPT ED INCOME HAS TO BE APPORTIONED AND DISALLOWED UNDER SECTION 14A(1) EVE N THOUGH RULE 8D HAS NO APPLICATION TO THE RELEVANT YEAR. IT IS FOR THE A O TO DETERMINE AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSE HAD INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE IN RELATION TO THE EARNING OF INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE A CT AND IF SO TO QUANTIFY THE EXTENT OF DISALLOWANCE. THE AO WOULD HAVE TO ARRI VE AT HIS DETERMINATION AFTER FURNISHING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUC E ITS ACCOUNT AND TO PLACE ON RECORD ALL RELEVANT MATERIAL IN SUPPORT OF THE CIR CUMSTANCES WHICH ARE CONSIDERED TO BE RELEVANT AND GERMANE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT WE CONSIDER IT JUST AND PROPER T O RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE . / ITA NO.52/MUM/2012 % % % % / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 3 OF AO WITH A DIRECTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE SAME I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEAR ING. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10/07/20 13 1 - /0% # 3 45 10/07/2013 0 - 6 7 SD/- SD/- ( !' / N.K.BILLAIYA ) ( . . / I.P. BANSAL ) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 4 DATED 10/07/2013 1 1 1 1 - -- - *.89 *.89 *.89 *.89 :9%. :9%. :9%. :9%. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. &) / THE APPELLANT 2. *+&) / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ; ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. ; / CIT 5. 9<6 *. / DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. 6= > / GUARD FILE. 1 1 1 1 / BY ORDER +9. *. //TRUE COPY// ? ?? ? / @ @ @ @ ' ' ' ' (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI . . ./ VM SR. PS