ITO 3(2)(1), MUMBAI v. IMAGEADS & COMMUNICATIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5896/MUM/2009 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 589619914 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN HJULY2010R
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 5896/MUM/2009
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant ITO 3(2)(1), MUMBAI
Respondent IMAGEADS & COMMUNICATIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted I
Tribunal Order Date 30-07-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 05-11-2009
Judgment Text
1 ITA NO. 5896/MUM/2009 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH I MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R S PADVEKAR JM SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH AM ITA NO. 5896/MUM/2009 (ASST YEAR 2003-04) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1) MUMBAI VS M/S IMAGEADS & COMMUNICATIONS P LTD 103 MITTAL CHAMEBRS NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 21 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN AAAC13314A ASSESSEE BY: SHRI I P RATHI/RAJIV KHAWTE REVENUE BY: SHRI SUMEET KUMAR O R D E R PER R S PADVEKAR: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE CHALLENG ING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A)-III MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2003-04 DATED 26.8.20909 AND TAKEN THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CZIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS. 21 00 00/- 2 WE HAVE THE PARTIES. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED THAT ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04-05 THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE DISMISS ING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE LD COUNSEL FILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2004-05 BEING ITA NO.228 1/MUM/2008 DATED 2 ITA NO. 5896/MUM/2009 26.6.2009. THE LD DR FAIRLY CONSIDERED THAT THE IS SUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 3 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS THE ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND HAS HELD AS UNDER: WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE MAT ERIAL CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES MADE BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DURI NG THE YEAR HAD NOT CARRIED OUT ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY WHICH HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED TO ISPL VIDE AGREEMENT DATED 5.4.02. ON PERUSAL OF AGREEMENT AND OTHER RECORDS WE NOTICE THAT THE ASS ESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO CARRY ON THE BUSINESS RELATING TO THE P UBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING ON BEHALF OF ISPL TILL THE BUSINESS WAS FULLY TRANSFERRED AND THE ASSESSEE HAD TO PROVIDE ACCREDI TATION FACILITY. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO LEASED THE MOVABLE ASSETS TO ISPL FOR WHICH SERVICE CHARGES OF RS. 21 LAKHS HAD BEEN RECE IVED. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT CEASED AND THEREFORE EXPENSES CLAIMED CANNOT BE DISALLOW ED ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WERE NO RECEIPTS DURING THE Y EAR. MOREOVER THE EXPENSES CLAIMED BASICALLY RELATED TO TRAVELLIN G RATE AND TAXES INSURANCE AND AUDITING ETC. AND ALL SUCH EX PENSES ARE REQUIRED TO BE ALLOWED PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE WAS NO FINDING THAT ANY OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED WERE BOGUS. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES WE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AND THE SAME IS THEREFORE UPHELD. 4 WE THEREFORE FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L REFERRED SUPRA CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) FOR THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION ALSO. 3 ITA NO. 5896/MUM/2009 5 IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 30 TH DAY OF JULY 2010. SD/- SD/- ( RAJENDRA SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (R S PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: MUMBAI : DATED: 3TH JULY 2010 RAJ* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT 4 CIT(A) 5 DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER DY /AR ITAT MUMBAI