Viraj Alloys Ltd, Mumbai vs Assessee
- CitationITA No. : 1915/Mum/2008
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's reasoning rests on a single point: where the revenue authorities have misread the scheme sanctioned by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and the additions made in assessment are linked to that scheme, the impugned assessment is to be set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment de novo, in accordance with the law and with the scheme as directed by the BIFR.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH "F", MUMBAI सवᭅ᮰ी नरे ᭠ᮤ कु मार िब᭨लै᭦या, लेखा सद᭭य एवं िववेक वमाᭅ, ᭠याियक सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. : 1915/Mum/2008 (Assessment year: 1999-2000) ITA No. : 1919/Mum/2008 (Assessment year: 2003-2004) ITA No. : 302/Mum/2008 (Assessment year: 2004-2005) ITA No. : 303/Mum/2008 (Assessment year: 2005-2006) M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd., Vs DCIT, Central Circle -18 & 19, 10, Imperial Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Wilson Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai -400 038 ःथयी लेखा सं.:PAN: AAACV 2755 L अपीलाथȸ (Appellant) ू×यथȸ (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satish Chandak & Ms. Bhumika Vora Respondent by : Ms S Padmaja
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख /Date of Hearing : 24-12-2014 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 14-01-2015
आ दे श ORDER ᮰ी िववेक वमाᭅ, ᭠या स: स: PER VIVEK VARMA, JM:
The following appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of CIT(A):
ITA No. Asst. Year CIT(A) Order dated 1915/Mum/2008 1999-2000 VI, Mumbai 21.01.2008 1919/Mum/2008 2003-2004 VI, Mumbai 23.01.2008 302/Mum/2008 2004-2005 VI, Mumbai 26.11.2007 303/Mum/2008 2005-2006 VI, Mumbai 26.11.2007
wherein several grounds have been raised on merits.
2 M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd.
ITA 1915/Mum/2008 ITA 1919/Mum/2008 ITA 302/Mum/2008 ITA 303/Mum/2008
2. At the time of hearing, the AR pointed out that the assessee had approached Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR), based on the financial results for 31.03.2000. BIFR in its order, ordered amongst other issues to, "i) Income tax To consider
i) To extend the benefit of carry forward of losses beyond the eight year period as prescribed in Section 72(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
ii) To grant exemptions under provisions of Section 41(1) i.e. interest waiver/penalty waiver not to be treated as Income.
iii) 43B Disallowance relating to payment of Sales Tax/Loans etc. not to be considered.
iv) To exempt the company from application of 115JB i.e. MAT till such time the company has fully utilized its carry forward book losses and unabsorbed depreciation.
v) To exempt the company under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act so that the company is allowed to carry forward the unabsorbed losses".
3. This order, as per AR was wrongly interpreted by the revenue authorities, wherein, it was read as "Income Tax department may consider". Thus, the revenue authorities erred in not considering the observations of BIFR with regard to various exemptions granted by it.
4. The DR on the other hand supported the orders of the revenue authorities in the years under consideration.
5. On going through the scheme offered by the BIFR, we find that the revenue authorities had misinterpreted the directions/scheme as mentioned above. Since all the additions, as made by the revenue authorities pertain & linked to the scheme of the BIFR, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned assessment be restored to the AO.
3 M/s Viraj Alloys Ltd.
ITA 1915/Mum/2008 ITA 1919/Mum/2008 ITA 302/Mum/2008 ITA 303/Mum/2008
6. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders of CIT(A) in all the four years before us and restore the cases to the file of AO for assessments be framed afresh de novo, as per law and as per the scheme directed by BIFR.
7. In the result, the appeals as mentioned above are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 14th January, 2015.
(नरे ᭠ᮤ कु मार िब᭨लै᭦या) (िववेक वमाᭅ) Sd/- Sd/-
लेखा सद᭭य ᭠याईक सद᭭य (N.K. BILLAIYA) (VIVEK VARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Date: 14th January, 2015
ूित/Copy to:-
1) अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant.
2) ू×यथȸ /The Respondent.
3) The CIT(A)Central -VI, Mumbai.
4) The CIT- Central -II, Mumbai.
5) ǒवभागीय ूितिनिध "यॅफ़", आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुब ं ई/ The D.R. "F" Bench, Mumbai.
6) गाड[ फाईल Copy to Guard File.
आदे शानुसार/By Order / / True Copy / /
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुबं ई Dy./Asstt. Registrar I.T.A.T., Mumbai *च᭪हान व.िन.स *Chavan, Sr.PS
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free