Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle–36, Mumbai - 2016-LL-0919-56

Citation	2016-LL-0919-56
Appellant Name	Adhivitiya Properties Ltd.
Respondent Name	Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle–36, Mumbai
Court	ITAT-Mumbai
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	19/09/2016
Assessment Year	2010-11
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	interest paid
Bot Summary:	Respondent Central Circle 36, Mumbai Revenue by : Shri C.S. Sharma Assessee by : None Date of Hearing 19.09.2016 Date of Order 19.09.2016 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Instant appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29th January 2015, passed by the learned Commissioner 53, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2010 11. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(A) 53 has erred in confirming the following disallowances: a. Disallowance under rule 8D(2)(i) of Rs. 33,93,833/- Less Rs. 2 Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. 22,88,673/- disallowance already offered by the appellant) u/s 14A of the Act. a. Disallowance of 50 of administrative expenses u/s rule 8D(2) amounting to Rs. 37,704/- u/s 14A of the Act. b. Disallowance of differential interest of 3 between interest paid of 15 to Ackruti City Limited and interest received of 12 from Gandhi Adhivitiya, a firm in which the Appellant is a partner. The Ld. CIT(A) had also grossly erred in stepping into the shoes of the LAO for making the calculation of disallowance u/s 14A after finding merit in the plea of the appellant that the LAO had not given any cogent reason for rejecting the working of the suo-moto disallowance offered by the Appellant. On a perusal of the record available before us, we find that assessee, by way of a letter dated 14th September 2016, prayed for withdrawal of appeal for the reason that the grounds raised are not sustainable. The learned Departmental Representative has not opposed to the contents of the said letter withdrawing the appeal by the assessee.

IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADI NATH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.3063/Mum./2015 (Assessment Year : 2010 11) Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. Raheja Chamber, Office no.317 3rd Floor, Free Press Marg . Appellant Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 PAN AAACA6103B v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax . Respondent Central Circle 36, Mumbai Revenue by : Shri C.S. Sharma Assessee by : None Date of Hearing 19.09.2016 Date of Order 19.09.2016 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Instant appeal by assessee is directed against order dated 29th January 2015, passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) 53, Mumbai, for assessment year 2010 11. Effective grounds raised by Department are as under: 1. On facts and circumstances of case and in law Learned CIT(A) 53 has erred in confirming following disallowances: a. Disallowance under rule 8D(2)(i) of Rs. 33,93,833/- (Rs. 56,82,506/- (disallowance calculated by Ld. CIT(A) Less Rs. 2 Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. 22,88,673/- disallowance already offered by appellant) u/s 14A of Act. a. Disallowance of 50% of administrative expenses u/s rule 8D(2) (iii) amounting to Rs. 37,704/- u/s 14A of Act. b. Disallowance of differential interest of 3% between interest paid of 15 % to Ackruti City Limited and interest received of 12% from Gandhi Adhivitiya, firm in which Appellant is partner. 2. Ld. CIT(A) had also grossly erred in stepping into shoes of LAO for making calculation of disallowance u/s 14A after finding merit in plea of appellant that LAO had not given any cogent reason for rejecting working of suo-moto disallowance offered by Appellant. Appellant pleads that act of Ld. CIT(A) is illegal and void ab-initio. 2. When case was called for hearing, neither assessee nor any of its authorised representatives appeared before us for prosecuting present appeal. However, on perusal of record available before us, we find that assessee, by way of letter dated 14th September 2016, prayed for withdrawal of appeal for reason that grounds raised are not sustainable. learned Departmental Representative has not opposed to contents of said letter withdrawing appeal by assessee. Consequently, we treat this appeal as withdrawn. 3. In result, appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced in open Court on 19.09.2016 Sd/- Sd/- ANADI NATH MISHRA SAKTIJIT DEY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 19.09.2016 3 Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. Copy of order forwarded to: (1) Assessee; (2) Revenue; (3) CIT(A); (4) CIT, Mumbai City concerned; (5) DR, ITAT, Mumbai; (6) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Adhivitiya Properties Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle–36, Mumbai

Metadata

Judgment