Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Reliance Industries Limited , Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 23 November, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K", BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM MA No.308/Mum/2017 (Arising Out of 4379/Mum/2012) (Assessment Year 2007-08) MA No.309/Mum/2017 (Arising Out of 796/Mum/2013) (Assessment Year 2008-09) MA No.310/Mum/2017 (Arising Out of:1892/Mum/2014) (Assessment Year 2009 -10) M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd., Vs. ACIT(LTU) rd 3 Floor, Mumbai Maker Chamber-IV 222, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400 021 PAN/GIR No.AAACR5055K Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri Arvind Sonde Revenue by Shri Purushottam Kumar Date of Hearing 06/10/2017 Date of Pronouncement 23/11/2017 आदे श / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):
These M.A. arose out of ITA Nos.4379/Mum/2017, 796/Mum/2013 and 1892/Mum/2014 respectively, arising out of order of Tribunal dated 12/04/2017.
2. It was argued by learned AR that Ground No.1, 6b and 6c were not adjudicated by the Tribunal. It was also pointed out that Ground No.6 of 2 ITA No.308/Mum/2017 to 310/Mum/2017 M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd., Revenue appeal in ITA No.4361/Mum/2012 was also not disposed off by the Tribunal which amounts to mistake apparent from record.
3. We have gone through the order of the Tribunal and the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee and found that in Ground No.1, assessee has taken an alternative ground regarding deemed payment of sales tax, therefore, amount is allowable as per provisions of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act.
4. From the order of the Tribunal, we found that since the main ground was allowed in favour of the assessee, the alternative ground was not disposed off and dismissed in limini.
5. In Ground No.6b, assessee was aggrieved by the action of the AO treating the non-funded guarantee given by the assessee to Bank of America for giving loan to its associate concern as international transaction within meaning of Section 92B r.w.S.92(1) of the Income Tax Act. We had adjudicated on merit that transfer pricing adjustment is to be made with respect to guarantee given by assessee to the bank, therefore, the ground taken by the assessee for not treating the same as international transaction was rejected.
6. Ground No.6 relates to confirming the addition in respect of non-funded guarantee given for advancing loan to its associate concern.
7. We found that Tribunal have already dealt with this issue and by following the order of the Tribunal in earlier year restricted the addition.
Thus, there is no mistake in this part of the order of the Tribunal. 3 ITA No.308/Mum/2017 to 310/Mum/2017
M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd.,
8. Ground No.6 raised in Revenue's appeal was disposed by the Tribunal by observing that similar issue has been considered by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in the A.Y.2005-06 and 2006-07, wherein the addition on account of guarantee commission has been restricted to 0.385%. In para 84, rate has been mentioned as 0.38%. There is a typographical mistake and we direct the guarantee commission should be restricted to 0.385%.
9. Similar ground has been taken by the assessee in M.A.No.309/Mum//2017 and 310/Mum/2017. Following the reasoning given hereinabove, we direct the AO to dispose the same in terms of directions given in the A.Y.2007-08.
10. In the result, M.As filed by the assessee are disposed in terms indicated hereinabove.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 23/11/2017
Sd/- Sd/-
(RAVISH SOOD) (R.C.SHARMA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai; Dated 23/11/2017
Karuna Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A), Mumbai.
4. CIT
DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. BY ORDER,
6. Guard file.
सत्यापित प्रतत //True Copy//
(Asstt. Registrar)
ITAT, Mumbai