Fairdeal Filaments Ltd., , Surat vs Department Of Income Tax

ी मक ु ु ल कुमार ावत, या यक सद य एवं ी एन.एस. सैनी, लेखा सद य के सम% BEFORE SHRI MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Misc. Application No.37 & 38/Ahd/2014 IN ITA No1562 and 1576/Ahd/2010 [Asstt. Year: 2007-08]

ACIT, Cent.Cir.1 Fairdeal Filaments Ltd. Surat. Vs 3rd Floor, Dawer Chambers Ring Road, Nr.Sub-Jail Surat.

PAN : AAACF 3804 A.

अपीलाथ'/ (Applicant) )*यथ'/ (Respondent)

Assessee(s) by : Shri R.N. Vepari Revenue by : Shri Roopchand, Sr.DR

सन ु वाई क तार ख/ Dateof Hearing : 20/02/2015 घोषणा क तार ख / Date of Pronouncement: 27/02/2015

आदे श/O R D E R

PER MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These two Misc. Petitions, both have been filed on 25.2.2014 by the Revenue, raised an identical objection that on para-10, page no.10 the Tribunal, in the order in ITA No.1562, 1576/Ahd/2010 dated 15.2.2013 has mentioned that the ground no.1 of both sides are set aside, and hence treated as allowed for statistical purpose only.

2. The main grievance of the Revenue department is reproduced below:

MA Nos.37 and 38/Ahd/2014 2

"On perusal of the said appellate order of the ITAT, it is observed that in the first para on page 9 of the order it is written that on this count, we therefore hold that no addition is required in the hands of assessee. However in the first para of page no.10 of the order it is written that ground no.1of the both side are set aside hence to be treated as allowed for statistical purpose

It is clear from the above discussion that on the ground of appeal of the assessee, Hon'ble ITAT has deleted entire addition at one place and another place this issue has been set aside in the said appellate order. These facts of the appellate order create confusion, whether addition has been deleted or the issue of addition has been set aside. Hence miscellaneous application is to be filed before the Hon'ble ITAT 'B' Bench, Ahmedabad to clarify its decision on the issue."

3. On this short issue, we have heard both the sides.

4. We have reproduced the grounds of appeal, as raised from the side of the Revenue, as also from the side of the assessee. The ground no.1 of the assessee was in respect of disallowance under section 40A(2) of the IT Act , whereas, ground no1. of the Revenue was in respect of GP addition. Vide para-9, we have decided the ground no.1 of the Revenue department, and held that no addition was required in the hands of the assessee. Vide para 9.1 and 10, we have considered ground no.1 of the assessee and restored the issue for de novo consideration. Therefore, para-10 of the order of the Tribunal dated 15.2.2013, shall now reads as under:

"Result of the above discussion is that the ground no.1 of the assessee is set aside, hence be treated as allowed for statistical purpose, and Ground no.1 of the Revenue Deptt. is dismissed."

In consequence thereupon, the combined result in para-12 of the order shall be read, henceforth, as under:

MA Nos.37 and 38/Ahd/2014 3

"In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee may be treated as partly allowed, that too, for statistical purpose."

5. The above order of the Tribunal, is therefore, rectified accordingly.

6. In the result, the MA of the Revenue are allowed.

Order pronounced in the Court on Friday the 20th February, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- ( N.S. SAINI) (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER