DCIT, CHENNAI v. M/s Apex Laboratories Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 562/CHNY/2011 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 56221714 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAACA5174G
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 562/CHNY/2011
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, CHENNAI
Respondent M/s Apex Laboratories Ltd., CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 15-12-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 15-12-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 15-12-2011
Next Hearing Date 15-12-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 29-03-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.562/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT CHENNAI-600 101. VS. M/S. APEX LABORATORIES LTD. 76 C.P. RAMASAMY ROAD ALWARPET CHENNAI-600 018. PAN:AAACA5174G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) & C.O. NO.69/MDS/2011 (IN ITA NO.562/MDS/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S.APEX LABORATORIES LTD. 76 C.P.RAMASAMY ROAD ALWARPET CHENNAI-600 018. PAN:AAACA5174G VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT CHENNAI-600 101. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI R.B .NAIK CIT DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI V.S .MANOJ ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 15 TH DECEMBER 2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 TH DECEMBER 2011 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ARE DIRECTED ITA NO.562/ MDS/2011 & CO NO.69/MDS/2011 2 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-LTU CHENNAI DATED 12.01.2011. 2. PRESENT AS ABOVE. PARTIES HEARD. THE ISSUE INVOL VED IN THE REVENUE APPEAL IS IF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED O N PRINTING CHARGES ARE SUBJECTED TO TDS OR NOT. IT WAS TOLD AT THE VERY OUTSET THAT THIS ISSUE STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN A VERY CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5-06 THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE BENCH HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS EE. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THIS YEAR REMAIN EXACTLY IDENT ICAL. THEREFORE FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN IT A NO.438/MDS/2009 DATED 20.01.2011 WE HAVE TO DECIDE THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER CITED SUPRA IS BEING REPRODUCED FO R READY REFERENCE:- FROM THE ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PRINTING WAS DONE ON THE PACKING MATERIALS SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE. AS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) PRINTING MADE ON THE PACKING MATERIALS ARE JUST INCIDENTAL ITA NO.562/ MDS/2011 & CO NO.69/MDS/2011 3 IN THE SALES OF PACKING MATERIALS TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER IT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE US THAT THE BILLING IS DONE ON A COMPOSITE VALUE FOR THE PACKING MATERIALS WITHOUT DIFFERENTIATING ANY AMOUNT FOR THE PRINTING DONE. ALSO IT IS STATED THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFERED VAT (VALUE ADDED TAX) THROUGH THE PURCHASE INVOICES WHILE BUYING PRINTED PACKING MATERIALS. THEREFORE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO AGREE WITH THE ARGUMENT OF THE REVENUE THAT THERE IS ANY ELEMENT OF CONTRACTUAL PAYMENT IN PURCHASING THE PRINTED PACKING MATERIALS BY THE ASSESSEE. WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE TRI BUNAL ORDER WE CANNOT ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND DISMI SS THE SAME. FURTHER TO STRENGTHEN OUR ABOVE VIEW WE FIND THAT THIS VERY BENCH HAS TAKEN A SIMILAR VIEW IN ANOTHER CASE OF ACIT VS. M/S. TUBE INVESTMENTS OF INDIA LTD. REPORTED I N 2011- TIOL-395-ITAT-MAD. IN THIS ORDER WHICH WAS RENDERE D ON ITA NO.562/ MDS/2011 & CO NO.69/MDS/2011 4 23 RD MAY 2011 IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE INVOICES CL EARLY SHOW THAT SALES TAX AND EXCISE DUTY WERE COLLECTED ON THE SUPPLY OF MATERIALS BY THE VENDORS PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 194C WILL NOT APPLY. 3. ACCORDINGLY WE DISMISS THE REVENUE APPEAL. 4. THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS MERELY SUPPORTING THE DECISION OF THE CIT(A) AND NO FRESH RELIEF HAS BEEN CLAIMED. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE A ND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 15 TH DECEMBER 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P.GEORGE) (HARI OM MARATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 15 TH DECEMBER 2011. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT ( 4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.