Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-39, Mumbai v. Cello Writing Inst. And Cont P Ltd
[Citation -2016-LL-0916-125]

Citation 2016-LL-0916-125
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-39, Mumbai
Respondent Name Cello Writing Inst. And Cont P Ltd.
Court ITAT-Mumbai
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 16/09/2016
Assessment Year 2003-04
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags supporting manufacturer • export house • tax effect
Bot Summary: PAN : AABCC2211P : Appellant by : Shri Vijay Kumar Bora Respondent by : S/Shri Dhanesh Bafana and Ravi Sawana Date of Hearing : 12.08.2016 Date of : 16.9.2016 Pronouncement O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the revenue is seeking to rectify the order dated 28.8.2007 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, requesting therein to uphold the order passed u/s 263 by the Commissioner on the ground that the order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The contention of the revenue is that the export house is not eligible for the benefit of section 80HHC as the eligible deduction on aggregation of deduction calculated on trading export and manufacturing exports was negative by relying on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories reported in 266 ITR 521. AR, at the outset submitted that the tax effect involved in ITA No.400/M/2006 which is sought to be recalled vide MA No.354/M/2009 dated 15th May, 2009 was less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, the MA as filed by the revenue recalling the order passed by the ITAT be set aside as the order passed by the Commissioner was not maintainable as prescribed by the Central Board of Director Taxes(CBDT), vide its Circular No.21/2015(F.No. We find that in the order sought to be recalled by this Miscellaneous Application the tax effect involved in this matter is less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore by following the CBDT circular dated 10.12.2015, the Misc.Application filed by the revenue is not maintainable and hence dismissed. In result the, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the revenue stands dismissed. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 4 MA No.354/M/2009 in ITA No.400/Mum/2006 9. Date on which file goes to A.R. 10.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Misc. Application No.354/Mum/2009 arising out of I.T.A. No.400/Mum/2006 (Assessment Year: 2003-04) Commissioner of Income Tax, Cello Writing Inst. And Cont P Central Circle-39, Ltd Mumbai 5,Vakil Indl. Estate, Vs. Walbhat Road, Goregaon (E), Mumbai. PAN : AABCC2211P ( Appellant) : ( Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vijay Kumar Bora Respondent by : S/Shri Dhanesh Bafana and Ravi Sawana Date of Hearing : 12.08.2016 Date of : 16.9.2016 Pronouncement O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A. M: By way of this Miscellaneous Application, revenue is seeking to rectify order dated 28.8.2007 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal, requesting therein to uphold order passed u/s 263 by Commissioner on ground that order passed by AO is erroneous and prejudicial to interest of Revenue. issue involved in this 2 MA No.354/M/2009 in ITA No.400/Mum/2006 case qua claim of deduction u/s 80HHC is of supporting manufacturer of M/s Cello Writing Instrument and Const. P Ltd which was export house. contention of revenue is that export house is not eligible for benefit of section 80HHC as eligible deduction on aggregation of deduction calculated on trading export and manufacturing exports was negative by relying on decision of Hon ble Apex Court in case of IPCA Laboratories reported in 266 ITR 521. 2. ld.AR, at outset submitted that tax effect involved in ITA No.400/M/2006 which is sought to be recalled vide MA No.354/M/2009 dated 15th May, 2009 was less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, MA as filed by revenue recalling order passed by ITAT be set aside as order passed by Commissioner was not maintainable as prescribed by Central Board of Director Taxes(CBDT), vide its Circular No.21/2015(F.No.l42/2007-ITJ (Pt.) dated 10th December, 2015. 3. ld. DR also fairly agreed with submissions of ld.AR. 4. We have carefully considered rival contentions of parties. We find that in order sought to be recalled by this Miscellaneous Application tax effect involved in this matter is less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore by following CBDT circular dated 10.12.2015 (supra), Misc.Application filed by revenue is not maintainable and hence dismissed. 3 MA No.354/M/2009 in ITA No.400/Mum/2006 5. In result the, Miscellaneous Application filed by revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 16th Sept, 2016 Sd sd (C.N. Prasad) (Rajesh Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai; Dated :16.09.2016 SRL,Sr.PS Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File BY ORDER, True copy (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Date Initials 1. Draft dictated on 12.8.2016 SPS 2. Draft placed before author 16.9.2016 SPS 3. Draft proposed & placed before Second JM Member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr. PS SPS 6. Kept for pronouncement on SPS 7. File sent to Bench Clerk SPS 8. Date on which file goes to Head Clerk 4 MA No.354/M/2009 in ITA No.400/Mum/2006 9. Date on which file goes to A.R. 10. Date of dispatch of order Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-39, Mumbai v. Cello Writing Inst. And Cont P Ltd
Report Error