The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai v. M/s. Mohd.Idris Brothers Pvt. Ltd
[Citation -2016-LL-1007-46]

Citation 2016-LL-1007-46
Appellant Name The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai
Respondent Name M/s. Mohd.Idris Brothers Pvt. Ltd.
Court ITAT-Chennai
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/10/2016
Assessment Year 2011-12
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags private limited company • payment in cash • textile goods
Bot Summary: PAN: AAACM5231 G Appellant by : Mr.Supriyo Pal, JCIT Respondent by : Mr. M.Razzack Da t e of h e ar in g : 15th September, 2016 D at e of Pr on oun c em ent : 7th October, 2016 ORDER Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:- The appeal and the cross objection are filed by the Revenue and the assessee respectively aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax- 8, Chennai dated 29.01.2016 in ITA No.47 2014-15 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 250(6) of the Act. The cross objection filed by the assessee is in support of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in manufacture, purchase and sale of yarn and textile goods filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 on 24.10.2011 admitting income of Rs.59,48,363 -. On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax following the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case and on the same facts held the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under:- There is no change in the facts of the case in the current assessment year. The Ld.D.R vehemently argued is support of the order of the Ld.A.O and further relied on the order of the Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case CIT V s Krishan Chand Maheswari Dass reported in 121 ITR 232, however could not rebut to the fact that the identical issue in the assessee s own case for the preceding assessment year was decided in favour of the assessee by the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal. Since the learned Commissioner of Income Tax has only followed the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case in the preceding assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No.104 Mds 2014 on similar and identical facts, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax. We further find that the cross objection of the assessee is only in support of the Order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax accordingly the same is also allowed.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , B BENCH, CHENNAI, BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . I.T. A. No.908 Mds 2016 & C.O.N o.69 Mds 2 016 ( Assessm ent Year: 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner of Vs M s.Mohd.Idris Brothers Pvt.Ltd., Income Tax, 5, Armenian Street, Mannady, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai-600 001. Chennai. PAN: AAACM5231 G ( Appellant) ( Respondent Cross objector) Appellant by : Mr.Supriyo Pal, JCIT Respondent by : Mr. M.Razzack Da t e of h e ar in g : 15th September, 2016 D at e of Pr on oun c em ent : 7th October, 2016 ORDER Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:- appeal and cross objection are filed by Revenue and assessee respectively aggrieved by order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 8, Chennai dated 29.01.2016 in ITA No.47 2014-15 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 250(6) of Act. ITA No.908 Mds 2016 (A.Y. 2011-12): 2. Revenue has raised several grounds in its appeal, however crux of issue is as follows:- learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting disallowance of Rs.2,07,30,876 - made by learned Assessing Officer for making payment to sister concerns in cash exceeding Rs.20,000 - by 2 ITA No.908 Mds 2016 & C.O.NO.69 Mds 2016 invoking provisions of section 40A(3A) of Act. Cross Objection No.69 Mds 2016: 3. cross objection filed by assessee is in support of order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. Brief facts of case are that assessee is private limited company engaged in manufacture, purchase and sale of yarn and textile goods filed its return of income for assessment year 2011-12 on 24.10.2011 admitting income of Rs.59,48,363 -. case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) was issued to assessee on 10.09.2012. Subsequently assessment was completed on 27.03.2014, wherein learned Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.2,07,30,876 - invoking provisions of section 40A(3A) of Act because assessee had made payment in cash exceeding Rs.20,000 - to its sister concerns. 3 ITA No.908 Mds 2016 & C.O.NO.69 Mds 2016 5. On appeal, learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) following decision of Chennai Bench of Tribunal in assessee s own case and on same facts held issue in favour of assessee by observing as under:- There is no change in facts of case in current assessment year. In view of above and respectfully following decision of Hon ble ITAT in appellant s own case disallowance f Rs.2,07,30,876 - u s.40A(3) made by Assessing Officer is deleted. appellant succeeds on this ground. 6. Ld.D.R vehemently argued is support of order of Ld.A.O and further relied on order of Hon ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case CIT V s Krishan Chand Maheswari Dass reported in 121 ITR 232, however could not rebut to fact that identical issue in assessee s own case for preceding assessment year was decided in favour of assessee by Chennai Bench of Tribunal. A.R on other hand relied on Order of Ld.CIT(A). 4 ITA No.908 Mds 2016 & C.O.NO.69 Mds 2016 7. We have heard rival submissions and carefully perused materials available on record. Since learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has only followed decision of Tribunal in assessee s own case in preceding assessment year 2010-11 in ITA No.104 Mds 2014 on similar and identical facts, we do not find it necessary to interfere with order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Accordingly, appeal is held in favour of assessee. We further find that cross objection of assessee is only in support of Order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) accordingly same is also allowed. 7. In result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 7th October, 2016 Sd - Sd -( Duvvuru RL Reddy ) (A. Mohan Alankamony) Judicial Member Accountant Member Chennai, Dated 7th October, 2016 Somu 5 ITA No.908 Mds 2016 & C.O.NO.69 Mds 2016 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. GF Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai v. M/s. Mohd.Idris Brothers Pvt. Ltd
Report Error