ACIT, CHENNAI v. M/s. Maris Hotels & Theatres Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 813/CHNY/2011 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 81321714 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAACM2174N
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 813/CHNY/2011
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, CHENNAI
Respondent M/s. Maris Hotels & Theatres Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 22-07-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 02-05-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH D CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI AM AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN J.M. .. I.T.A. NO. 813/MDS/2011 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07] ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX COMPANY CIRCLE IV(1) CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S MARIS HOTELS & THEATRES P. LTD NO. 11 CATHEDRAL ROAD CHENNAI 600 086. PAN NO. AAACM 2174 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R. MEENAKSHISUNDARAM DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN JR. STANDING COUNSEL O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI A.M :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)- V CHENNAI DATED 03.02.2011. PAGE 2 OF 5 I.T.A. NO. 813/MDS/2011 2. THE SOLE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS APP EAL IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND ADJUST THE CARRY FORWARD DEP RECIATION LOSS AND TO EXAMINE THE CREDIT NOT GIVEN FOR TDS AND ALS O ERRED IN ADMITTING THIS APPEAL AS SECTION 246A OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHORT THE ACT] PROVIDES THAT ONLY AN INTIMATI ON U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT WHERE THE ASSESSEE OBJECTS TO MAKING ANY ADJUS TMENTS IS AN APPEALABLE ORDER. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF HOTEL GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF E LECTRICITY. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 6.10.2006 ADMITT ING NIL INCOME AFTER SETTING OFF UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AGAINST THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 2 33 72 796/-. THE BALANCE OF UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND 2004-05 ELIGIBLE FOR CARRY FORWARD TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 30 29 8 42/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE ASSESSING INCOME DID NOT A DJUST CARRY FORWARD DEPRECIATION FROM GROSS TOTAL INCOME AND TA X DEDUCTED AT PAGE 3 OF 5 I.T.A. NO. 813/MDS/2011 SOURCE OF RS. 5 54 213/- FROM TAX PAYABLE TO ARRIV E AT TAX DEMAND OF RS. 85 00 146/-. 4. IN APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) HELD AS UNDER: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ABOVE FACTS AND DOCUMENTS PRO DUCED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND OF THE VIEW THA T THE DEPRECIATION LOSS DETERMINED IN THE EARLIER ASSESSM ENT YEARS TAKES THE CHARACTER OF CURRENT YEARS INCOME AND HA VING CONSIDERED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE UNAB SORBED DEPRECIATION WHILE PROCESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THEREFORE DIRECTED TO GO THR OUGH THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND ADJUST THE CARRY FORWARD DEPR ECIATION LOSS AGAINST THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME. AS REGARDS TH E CREDIT NOT GIVEN FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE THE ISSUE CAN BE E XAMINED AFRESH AND THE ENTITLED CREDIT CAN BE GRANTED FOR A PPELLANT COMPANY. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THE R EVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. PAGE 4 OF 5 I.T.A. NO. 813/MDS/2011 6. THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO WHERE AS THE LD. A.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WE FIND THAT IN THE INSTANT CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE RE TURN AND ALLOW DEDUCTION OF BROUGHT FORWARD UNABSORBED DEPRECIATIO N AND CREDIT OF TDS AS PER LAW. WE FIND THAT NO DIRECTION TO CAUSE ANY PREJUDICE TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE WAS GIVEN BY THE LD. CI T(A). THE LD. D.R. COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY PREJUDICE WHICH WAS CA USED TO THE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A). WE ARE REMINDED OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COU RT IN THE CASE OF RAM LAL VS. REWA COAL FIELDS LTD. AIR 1962 [SC] 361 WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN RECENTLY FOLLOWED BY THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF S.R. KOSHTI VS. CIT 276 ITR 165 [GUJ] T HAT THE SAID AUTHORITIES SHOULD NOT RAISE TECHNICAL PLEAS IF THE CITIZENS HAVE LAWFUL RIGHT AND LAWFUL RIGHT IS BEING DENIED TO TH EM MERELY ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS. THE SAID AUTHORITIES CANNOT ADO PT AN ATTITUDE WHICH PRIVATE LITIGANTS MIGHT ADOPT. WE THEREFORE DO NOT FIND ANY PAGE 5 OF 5 I.T.A. NO. 813/MDS/2011 FORCE IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND H ENCE IT IS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22 ND JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- ((GEORGE MATHAN ) (N.S. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 22 ND JULY 2011. VL COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE