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

         BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
                SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                                ITA No.5773/M/2012
                              Assessment Year: 2009-10

        M/s. Pravin Trust,                   ITO 14(1)(1),
        1st Floor, 333,                      R.No.204, 2nd Floor,
        Shaikh Memon Street,                 Earnest House,
                                         Vs.
        Corner of Mirchi Gally,              Nariman Point,
        Green Market,                        Mumbai - 400021
        Mumbai ­ 400 002
        PAN: AAATP 0521H
              (Appellant)                        (Respondent)

      Assessee by                 : Shri Apurva Shah, A.R.
      Revenue by                  : Shri Premanand J., D.R.

      Date of Hearing             : 18.12.2014
      Date of Pronouncement       : 04.03.2015

                                    ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

      The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order
dated 25.06.2012 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [(hereinafter
referred to as CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.






2.    The sole ground taken by the assessee is relating to the confirmation of
disallowance of business expenses of Rs.3,02,333/-. During the assessment
proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) observed
that the assessee had claimed different business expenses amounting to
Rs.3,02,333/- inspite of the fact that there was no business activity during the
year. Being not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee in respect
of the matter, he disallowed the expenses.
                                           2                          ITA No.5773/M/2012
                                                                          M/s. Pravin Trust
3.       In appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that there was a
temporary lull and business had become temporary dormant. However, the
stock was not written off. Due to the poor financial condition of the assessee,
no sale or purchase transaction was carried out during the year. The Ld.
CIT(A), however, observed that the assessee had carried out its business
activity up to the financial year 2003-04 only.           The assessee had shown
opening stock consisting of groundnuts, chilly, cumin seeds, coriander seeds
etc. which were carried forward as closing stock.            The business was not
continued after A.Y. 2004-05. Hence, it could not be said that there was a
temporary lull. The claim of the expenses was not justified without carrying
out any single transaction of trading. He therefore confirmed the disallowance.






4.       We find that the stock in trade has been shown of groundnuts, chilly,
cumin seeds, coriander seeds etc. which commodities are perishable in nature.
The assessee had carried out its last business activity in the year 2004. The
stock, which has a very small shelf life, cannot be presumed to have existed up
to the year under consideration. Even the assessee has not given any evidence
to show that the business has been recommenced even till date. Under such
circumstances, the claim of expenditure in relation to business activity of the
assessee cannot be held to be justified. We do not find any infirmity in the
order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby upheld.

5.       In the result, the appeal of the assessee is therefore dismissed.

                  Order pronounced in the open court on 04.03.2015.

              Sd/-                                             Sd/-

    (R.C. Sharma)                                         (Sanjay Garg)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                     JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 04.03.2015.
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.
Copy to: The Appellant
                                            3                      ITA No.5773/M/2012
                                                                       M/s. Pravin Trust
        The Respondent
        The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
        The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai
        The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//                           [




                                                By Order



                              Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.