The ACIT,B.K.Circle,, Palanpur v. The Banaskantha Dist.Co.Op.Milk Producers Union Ltd.,, Palanpur

MA 185/AHD/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 18520524 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAAAB0575E
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number MA 185/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant The ACIT,B.K.Circle,, Palanpur
Respondent The Banaskantha Dist.Co.Op.Milk Producers Union Ltd.,, Palanpur
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 10-12-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 10-12-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 13-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : A BENCH : AHMEDABAD (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA J.M. & HONBLE SH RI N.S. SAINI A.M.) M.A. NO. 185/AHD/2010 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO. 3599/AHD./2008) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -VS.- THE BANASKANTHA DISTRICT CO. OP. MILK B.K. CIRCLE PALANPUR PRODUCERS UNION LTD. PALANPUR (PAN : AAAAB 0575 E) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI ROHIT MEH RA SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUNIL H. TALATI O R D E R PER SHRI T.K. SHARMA JUDICIAL MEMBER :- THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE REVENUE POINTING OUT THAT TRIBUNAL HAS COMMITTED CE RTAIN MISTAKES IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.02.2010 IN ITA NO. 3599/AHD/2008. THE CONT ENTS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION ARE AS UNDER :- THE ABOVE REFERRED APPEAL WAS DECIDED BY THE HON'B LE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER NO. 3594/AHD./2008 & 3599/AHD/2 008 DATED 26.02.2010 HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS THE ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIT AHMEDABAD-IV AH MEDABAD ON 13.04.2010. AFTER DUE STUDY OF YOUR HONOURS ORDER IT IS NOTICE D THAT THERE APPEARS SOME DISCREPANCIES IN THE ORDER. ON THE FACE OF THE ORDER APPEAL NO. SHOWN AS 3599/AHD/2008 WHERE AS IN PARA NO. 11 OF T HE ORDER APPEAL NO. SHOWN AS 3599/KOL./2009. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED TH AT THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS MENTIONED IN PARA NO. 11 OF THE ORDER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE RELEVANT TO THE CASE OF THE ASSESS EE AS IT DOES NOT FORM GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HON'B LE ITAT. IT IS THEREFORE HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE MISC. APPLI CATION MAY BE ADMITTED AND NECESSARY ORDER MAY BE PASSED ACCORDINGLY IF DEEME D FIT. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATION ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE SHRI SUNIL H. TALATI LD. COUNSEL APPEARED AND FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT IN PARA 11 ON PAGE 3 THROUGH TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF SOME OT HER HAVE BEEN MENTIONED. HE FURTHER 2 M.A. NO. 185/AHD/2010 SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN ADJUDICATING THE ACTUAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 3599/AHD/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 3. SHRI ROHIT MEHRA LD. SR. D.R. APPEARING ON BEH ALF OF THE REVENUE ALSO ADMITTED THE SAME AND CONTENDED THAT IN PARA 11 BE SUBSTITUTED B Y MENTIONING THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 3599/AHD/2008 FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2005-06. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 26.02.2010. PARA 11 OF THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2010 R EADS AS UNDER :- 11. NOW WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL BEING I.T.A. NO. 3599/KOL./2009 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- (1) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D READ WI TH SECTION 14A APPLY TO THE PRESENT YEAR AND DIRECTED THE AO TO CA LCULATE THE EXPENDITURE U/S. 14A FOR THE YEAR ACCORDINGLY. (2) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN NOT HOLDING THAT SINCE NO EXPENSES HAVE AT ALL BEEN INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY TO EARN THE DIVID END INCOME NO EXPENSES ARE REQUIRED TO BE ALLOCATED AGAINST EARNI NG OF SUCH INCOME. THE CORRECT I.T.A. NO. OF THE ASSESSEE IS I.T.A. NO . 3599/AHD/2008. IT APPEARS THAT THROUGH INADVERTENCE / TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKE THE GROUNDS O F APPEAL OF SOMEOTHER HAVE BEEN MENTIONED. WE ACCORDINGLY SUBSTITUTE THE PARA 11 WITH THE FOLL OWING PARA :- 11. NOW WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL BEING I.T.A. NO. 3599 /AHD./2008 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE F OLLOWING GROUNDS :- (1) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E DENIAL OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB OF THE I.T. ACT OF RS.82 64 666 /- ON CATTLE FEED PLANT. YOUR APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IT HAS FULFILLED ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND RULES AND THEREFORE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S. 80IB IN RESPECT OF CATTLE FE ED PLANT BE GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT. (2) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT ENTERTAINING AND NOT GRANTING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB FOR BANAS-II DAIRY UNIT ON THE GROUND THAT THE CLAIM WAS NOT MADE BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AS THE APPELLANT HAS COMPLIED WIT H ALL THE 3 M.A. NO. 185/AHD/2010 CONDITIONS LAID DOWN U/S. 80IB OF THE I.T. ACT THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB BE GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT. 5. IN THE RESULT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE MIS CELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10.12.2010 SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (T.K. SHARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 10/12 / 2010 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE RESPONDENT 3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R. ITAT AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD LAHA/SR.P.S.