Growmore Leasing & Inv Ltd, Mumbai vs Assessee

सव ौी नरे ि कुमार ब लै या, लेखा सदःय एवं ववेक वमा , याियक सदःय के सम%

BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.5135 & 5136/Mum/2012 िनधा रण वष / Assessment Years:2007-08 & 2009-10 (िनधा AND आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2151/Mum/2013 िनधा रण वष / Assessment Year:2010-11 (िनधा M/s. Growmore Leasing & बनाम The ACIT, Cent Circle-31, बनाम/ Inv. Ltd., Mumbai Vs. 32, Madhuli, 3 r d Floor, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Nehru Centre, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 ःथायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : AAACG 4937D (अपीलाथ) /Appellant) .. (ू+यथ) / Respondent) अपीलाथ) ओर से/ Appellant by: Shri Vijay Mehta Shri Dharmesh Shah

ू+यथ) क- ओर से/Respondent by: Dr. P. Danial

सुनवाई क- तार/ख / Date of Hearing :05.03.2015 घोषणा क- तार/ख /Date of Pronouncement :05.03.2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

These three appeals by the assessee are against three separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-40, Mumbai for assessment years 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11 respectively. All these appeals have common 2 Growmore Leasing & Inv. Ltd.

grounds of appeal, therefore, they were heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that in all the three years involved he is not pressing ground No. 1,2 & 3. These grounds are accordingly dismissed as not pressed.

3. Ground No. 4 relates to the disallowance of interest expense. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought to our notice that the decision relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) while disposing this ground has been set aside by the Tribunal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

4. The Ld. Departmental Representative could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the Revenue.

5. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. While disposing the ground relating to the disallowance of interest, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the findings given in the case of Eminent Holdings Pvt. Ltd. We find that the Tribunal in the case of Eminent Holdings in ITA Nos. 2139, 2140 and 2141/Mum/2013 have followed the decision of the Tribunal given in common group case of Hitesh S. Mehta at para 2.3 of the order and restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Respectfully following the findings of the Co ordinate Bench, we restore this issue to the files of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6. Before closing this issue, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the Ld. CIT(A) has held that the issue of interest expenditure is pending before the Hon'ble Special Court. It is the say of the Ld. 3 Growmore Leasing & Inv. Ltd.

Counsel that the proceedings in which the said issue of interest was issued by the custodian have been already concluded which fact has already been recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. We, therefore, direct the Ld. CIT(A) to consider this fact while deciding the issue afresh. The Ld. CIT(A) may also direct for the taxing of income in the hands of the recipient (family members) in accordance with the method of accounting followed by them and as per the provisions of the law. Ground No. 4 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

7. Ground No. 5 relates to the computation of Book Profit u/s. 115JB of the Act.

8. In our considered opinion, this ground is consequential to our decision given for ground No. 4 (supra). This ground is accordingly disposed of.

9. Ground No. 6 relates to the charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act.

10. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought to our notice that an identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in one of the group cases viz., M/s. Harsh Estates Pvt. Ltd. in ITA Nos. 1035m 1033 and 3464/M/2013. We find force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel.

11. The Tribunal has considered this issue at para-6 of its order and restored the matter to the file of the AO to recompute the interest liability as per the provisions of the law. We direct accordingly. Ground No. 6 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

12. Ground No. 7 and additional ground raised by the assessee are not pressed, therefore it is dismissed as not pressed.

4 Growmore Leasing & Inv. Ltd.

13. In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in part for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 5th March, 2015

Sd/- Sd/-

(VIVEK VARMA ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) याियक सदःय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

मुंबई Mumbai; 3दनांक Dated : 5 March, 2015 th

व.िन.स./ RJ , Sr. PS

आदे श क- ूितिल प अमे षत/Copy षत of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ) / The Appellant

2. ू+यथ) / The Respondent.

3. आयकर आयु5(अपील) / The CIT(A)-

4. आयकर आयु5 / CIT

5. वभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ ार BY ORDER, स+या पत ूित //True Copy// उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai