IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH "I", MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 850/Mum/2013
Assessment Year: 2009-10
M/s. Inventure Growth & CIT(A)-8
Securities Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan
201, Viraj Tower, Near Vs. Mumbai 400 020
Landmark Western Express
Highway, Andheri East
Mumbai- 400 064
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Permanent Account No. :-AAACI 2044 K
Assessee by : Shri Paresh Vakharia
Revenue by : Shri Sanjeev Jain
Date of hearing : 03.06.2014
Date of Pronouncement : 08.08.2014
ORDER
PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM:
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the
Ld.CIT(A) -8, Mumbai dated 26.11.2012 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:-
"In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in
confirming disallowance of Rs.6,27,490/- u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act read
with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules.
The Ld.CIT(A) committed error in not appreciating your appellant's detailed
submissions on facts and also committed grave error in law in not
appreciating the legal precedents cited before, including the directly
applicable judgments of the jurisdictional High Court.
3. The relevant facts are that during the assessment proceedings, the AO
observed that the assessee had earned exempt income and allocated Rs.1,00,000/-
as expense towards earning the exempt income on ad hoc basis. However, the AO
computed the disallowance u/s 14A in accordance with the provision of Rule 8D at
ITA No. 850/Mum/2013
2 M/s. Inventure Growth & Securities Ltd.
Assessment Year: 2009-10
Rs.6,27,490/-. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A), by following the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for
the earlier A.Y. 2008-09, dismissed the ground of appeal and thereby confirmed the
said disallowance made by the AO. Aggrieved by the impugned decision, the
assessee is in appeal before us.
4. Having heard both the sides and perused the material on record, it is
pertinent to mention that according to the assessee, the assessee has not preferred
any further appeal to the Tribunal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the earlier
A.Y. 2008-09 considering the smallness of the amount involved in the said
assessment year. However, it has been brought to our notice that during the year
under consideration, the assessee has made elaborate submission citing various
decisions before the Ld.CIT(A) and pleaded that the disallowance made by the AO is
unwarranted. The relevant submission made before the Ld.CIT(A) is part of the
records and the same is available at pages 29 to 45 of the Paper Book. In view of
the fact that the Ld.CIT(A) has simply passed the impugned order without
considering the submissions and the case laws cited by the assessee and confirmed
the disallowance, we are of the considered view that it is just and proper to set aside
this appeal to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for readjudication after providing reasonable
opportunity of being heard for passing reasoned order. We direct and order
accordingly.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical
purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 8th day of August, 2014.
Sd/- Sd/-
(D. KARUNAKARA RAO) (Dr. S.T.M. PAVALAN)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated: 08.08.2014
*Srivastava
Copy to: The Appellant
The Respondent
The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
The CIT(A) Concerned, Mumbai
The DR "I" Bench
//True Copy//
By Order
Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.
|
