Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai

Hindustan Dorr Oliver Ltd., Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax on 16 January, 2014

                        अिधकरण मुंबई Ûयायपीठ 'जे' मुंबई ।
            आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,


     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL " J" BENCH, MUMBAI


सव[ौी आय.पी. बंसल, Ûयाियक सदःय एवं , नरे Ûि कुमार ǒबãलैáया, लेखा सदःय के सम¢

          BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, AM

              आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2109/Mum/2007
                  िनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year :2003-04
                (िनधा[
 The DCIT, 8(2),                    बनाम M/s. Hindustan Dorr
                                    बनाम/
Aayakar Bhavan,                           Oliver Ltd.,
                                      Vs.
Mumbai-400 020                            Dorr Oliver House,
                                          Chakala, Andheri (E),
                                          Mumbai-400 099
ःथायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : AAACH 0964D
    (अपीलाथȸ /Appellant)             ..       (ू×यथȸ / Respondent)
       अपीलाथȸ ओर से/ Appellant by:            Shri Rajan Bahadur
       ू×यथȸ कȧ ओर से/Respondent by:             Shri J.D. Mistry


            सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing               : 16.01.2014
            घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2014

                             आदे श / O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-VIII, Mumbai dt.08.12.2006 pertaining to A.Y. 2003-04.

2. The Revenue has raised two substantive grounds of appeal. Ground No. 1 relates to the grievance that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that Section 115-O(5) is not applicable in assessee's case for A.Y. 2003-04 thereby directing the AO to allow deduction claimed u/s. 80-M of the Act.

3. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 80- M on account of dividend received from M/s. Skol Breweries Ltd. amounting to Rs. 18,37,126/- on the ground that the assessee had in turn declared dividend amounting to Rs. 50,77,000/-. The dividend was paid during the financial year 2003-04 and was subject to corporate dividend tax u/s. 115-O of the I.T. Act. The AO was of the firm belief that once the provisio0ns of Sec. 115-O(5) is applied, the assessee becomes ineligible for any deduction u/s. 80-M of the Act and accordingly disallowed the sum of Rs. 18,37,126/-.

4. The assessee strongly agitated this matter before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has considered this grievance vide ground No. 2 of appeal before him and after considering the facts and the submissions and the legal decisions, the Ld. CIT(A) finally concluded that Sec. 115-O(5) is not applicable for the assessment year under consideration and directed the AO to allow deduction as claimed u/s. 80-M of the Act.

5. Aggrieved by this, Revenue is before us. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue has been settled in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Vs DCIT 323 ITR 97. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Castle Investment & Industries Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1713/M/06 for A.Y. 2003-04. The Ld. Counsel further relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Silvassa Industries Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 162/M/02 and also in the case of Kalkabod Byramjee & Sons Agency Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 4102/M/01.

6. The Ld. Departmental Representative fairly conceded this issue is settled in favour of the assessee.

7. We have carefully perused the orders of the lower authorities and the decisions relied upon by the assessee. We find force in the submissions of the Ld. Counsel. Respectfully following the decisions mentioned hereinabove, findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are confirmed. Ground No. 1 is accordingly dismissed.

8. With ground No. 2, the Revenue alleges that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the AO to allow deduction of Rs. 72,21,393/- being provision for warranty and filed services disallowed in earlier years and written back in the year under consideration in view of the fact that the disallowance in earlier year had been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A).

9. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2003-04 in ITA No. 1667/M/07 and pointed out that a similar issue was decided by the Tribunal.

10. The Ld. DR submitted that the issue may be restored back to the files of the AO for verification of the claim of the assessee.

11. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the orders of the lower authorities and the order of the Tribunal. We find that the Tribunal in A.Y. 2003-04 in ITA No. 1667/M/07 at para-6 has remitted the matter back to the files of the AO with a direction to decide the issue by following the directions given by the Tribunal for A.Y. 2000-01 and 2002-03. Facts and issues being identical, respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal (supra), we remit the matter back 4 ITA No. 2109/M/07 to the files of the AO with similar direction as given by the Tribunal in earlier assessment years. Ground No. 2 is allowed for statistical purposes.

12. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed in part for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16/01/2014 .

आदे श कȧ धोषणा खुले Ûयायालय मɅ Ǒदनांकः 16/01/2014 को कȧ गई ।

            Sd/-                                  Sd/-
     (I.P. BANSAL )                       (N.K. BILLAIYA)

Ûयाियक सदःय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; Ǒदनांक Dated 16/01/2014 व.िन.स./ RJ , Sr. PS आदे श कȧ ूितिलǒप अमेǒषत/Copy षत of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant

2. ू×यथȸ / The Respondent.

3. आयकर आयुƠ(अपील) / The CIT(A)-

4. आयकर आयुƠ / CIT

5. ǒवभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गाड[ फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ ार BY ORDER, स×याǒपत ूित //True Copy// उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai