Multicot Textiles P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Assessee

सव ौी ड . मुमोहन, उपा य! एवं नरे ि कुमार %ब&लै(या, लेखा सदःय के सम!

BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND

SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5343/Mum/2012 िनधा रण वष / Assessment Year: 2009-10 (िनधा

M/s. Multicot Textiles Pvt. बनाम/बनाम The Dy. C.I.T.-5(2), Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Shalimar House, 335, Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007 ःथायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : AAACH 0234G (अपीलाथ0 /Appellant) .. (ू2यथ0 / Respondent) अपीलाथ0 ओर से/ Appellant by: Shri K. Shivram Shri Rahul K. Hakani

ू2यथ0 क4 ओर से/Respondent by: Shri Vivek Batra

सुनवाई क4 तार ख / Date of Hearing :09.03.2015 घोषणा क4 तार ख /Date of Pronouncement :09.03.2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This is an appeal by the assessee preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-9, Mumbai dt. 4.6.2012 pertaining to assessment year 2009-

10. 2 ITA No. 5343/M/2012

2. The assessee has raised four substantive grounds of appeal. By ground No.(A), the assessee has challenged the validity of the order made u/s. 144 of the Act. Ground No. (B) relates to the disallowance of interest of Rs. 72,97,989/-. Ground No. (C) relates to the estimation of Business profit and ground No. (D) relates to the denial of set off of loss.

3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, drew our attention to the assessment order vis-à-vis the Paper Book filed before us and stated that vide reply to the notice dt. 21.10.2011 on 28.11.2011, the assessee had filed complete details as sought by the AO yet the AO did not consider the same while making the assessment order u/s. 144 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the findings of the AO without appreciating that the assessee had complied with the requirements made by the AO. The Ld. Counsel further drew our attention to the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in A.Y. 2006-07 vide ITA No. 5138/M/2010 and A.Y. 2007-08 vide ITA No. 1856/M/2011. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that in both these years, on identical issues the Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of the AO to decide the matter afresh.

4. The Ld. Departmental Representative fairly conceded to this.

5. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and the relevant documentary evidences brought to our notice. We have also gone through the decisions of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Yrs 2006-07 and 2007-08. We find that in A.Y. 2007-08 in ITA No. 1856/M/2011, the Tribunal has considered the issue relating to the disallowance of interest at para-7 of its order wherein the Tribunal has followed the decision of the Tribunal for A.Y. 2005-06 and at para-9 3 ITA No. 5343/M/2012

restored the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. We find that the facts and issues are common, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, we restore this issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on the same line as directed by the Tribunal for preceding assessment year. Ground No. B is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

6. In so far as the estimation of business profit is concerned, we find that the Tribunal has considered an identical issue in A.Y. 2006-07 in ITA No. 5138/M/2010. At para-6 of its order, the Tribunal has followed the decision given in earlier assessment years and restored the ground to the file of the AO with a direction to redo the assessment. Respectfully following the findings of the Co-ordinate Bench, we restore this issue to the file of the AO with a direction to decide it afresh following the directions of the Tribunal in earlier assessment years after giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ground No. C is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

7. The issue relating to set off of loss has not been decided by the Ld. CIT(A). We, accordingly restore this issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide this issue after giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ground No. D is allowed for statistical purpose.

8. As we have restored the matter relating to the disallowance of interest and estimation of business profit to the file of the AO to be decided afresh, grievance raised vide ground No. A is accordingly decided.

4 ITA No. 5343/M/2012 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 9th March, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (D.MANMOHAN ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) उपा य! / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

मुंबई Mumbai; 8दनांक Dated : 9th March, 2015 व.िन.स./ RJ , Sr. PS

आदे श क4 ूितिल%प अमे%षत/Copy षत of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ0 / The Appellant

2. ू2यथ0 / The Respondent.

3. आयकर आयु:(अपील) / The CIT(A)-

4. आयकर आयु: / CIT

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

6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ ार BY ORDER, स2या%पत ूित //True Copy// उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai