Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: VAT RATES :: empanelment :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: form 3cd :: due date for vat payment :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: VAT Audit :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: TDS :: cpt
 
 
From the Courts »
 Ravneet Takhar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ix And Ors.
 Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax
 Formula One World Championship Limited Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-3 And Anr.
 Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation-3 Delhi Vs. Formula One World Championship Ltd. And Anr.
 Reliance Communications Ltd vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai)
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
 Ashok Prapann Sharma vs. CIT (Supreme Court)a
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21

ITO-2(2)(4), R. No. 542, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 Vs. M/s Photogravours (India) Pvt. Ltd., 21, Seth Chambers, Dr. V.B. Gandhi Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400023
November, 24th 2015
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

                          MUMBAI BENCH "C", MUMBAI

        BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

                SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                            ITA No.1525/Mum/2014

                            Assessment Year: 2010-11

 ITO-2(2)(4),                               M/s Photogravours (India) Pvt. Ltd.,
 R. No. 542, 5th Floor,                     21, Seth Chambers, Dr. V.B. Gandhi
 Aayakar Bhavan,                        Vs. Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400023
 Mumbai-400020
                                            PAN: AAACP4088L

               (Appellant)                            (Respondent)



                      Revenue by            :   Shri Nimesh Yadav (DR)

                          Assessee by       : Shri Jitendra Singh, Miss.
                                              Neha Paranjpe



               Date of hearing              :     24.08.2015

              Date of Pronouncement :             20.11.2015



                                    ORDER

PER PAWAN SINGH, JM:

1.   The appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-5, Mumbai

     dated 12.12.2013 in respect of Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 on the following

     grounds of appeal:

         1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A)
            erred in allowing assessee's appeal without adjudicating the detailed
            evidences gathered by the AO.
         2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A)
            erred in directing the AO to compute the income from House Property on
            the basis of municipal retail value even though the prevailing market value
            in that area was much higher.
                                   2           ITA No. 1525/M/2014 M/s Photogravours (India) Pvt. Ltd.






         3. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, the
            decision of the CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the AO restored.

2.   The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on

     28.09.2010 for AY-2010-11 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The return of

     income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Statutory notice was served and

     after giving an opportunity, the Assessing Officer (AO) made the disallowance of

     Rs. 2,96,464/- of account of estimation of income and further a sum of Rs.

     5,02.20,000/- on account of income from "House Property" by invoking provision

     of section 23(1)(a), against which an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) and in

     the appeal both the additions were deleted by the CIT(A) in the impugned order

     dated 28.11.2013, against which the present appeal is filed before us challenging

     the order of CIT(A) only in respect of addition on account of income from "House

     Property" on the basis of municipal retail value.

3.   We have heard the Authorized Representative (AR) of the parties and perused

     the material available on record. The ld. AR of the assessee has relied upon the

     order of AO. The AR of the assessee has argued that similar additions were

     made in respect of income from "House Property" in AY-2007-08 against which

     an appeal was filed before the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal which was

     registered as ITA No. 1813/Mum/2011, and the same was allowed vide order

     dated 27.04.2011, against which the Revenue has preferred an appeal before

     the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court being ITA No. 1472 of 2012 and the same

     was dismissed. The Ld. AR for assessee has already placed on record the copy

     of the decision of co-ordinate bench of ITAT and Hon'ble High Court.

4.   Ld. AR of the assessee further argued that the issue raised by the Revenue in

     the present appeal is squarely covered by the order of Co-ordinate Bench in ITA
                                     3         ITA No. 1525/M/2014 M/s Photogravours (India) Pvt. Ltd.






      No. 1813/Mum/2011 which was subsequently approved by Hon'ble jurisdictional

      High Court.

5.    We have perused the order placed on record and after going through the same

      we are of the considered opinion that the issue raised in the present appeal is

      squarely covered by the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench as well as by the

      jurisdictional High Court and respectfully following the concurrent finding, we do

      not find any illegality in the order of CIT(A) dated 12.12.2013, hence the appeal

      filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

 6. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
 Order pronounced in the open court on this 20th November 2015.

                     Sd/-                                               Sd/-

             (R.C.SHARMA)                                      (PAWAN SINGH)

      ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                     JUDICIAL MEMBER

 Mumbai; Dated 20/11/2015
 S.K.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.
                             //True Copy/

                                                                  (Asstt.Registrar)
                                                                    ITAT, Mumbai

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Article Management Solutions System Article Management Software S

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions