Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD
Before: SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.:
This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A) - 3, Hyderabad, dated 09/06/2017 for the AY 2013-14.
Brief facts are, the assessee a company engaged in the business of operating ships and port services had filed its return of income for the AY 2013-14, declared total income of Rs. 2,67,560/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA for Rs. 1,19,496/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and total income was determined at Rs. 36,43,967/- by the AO, disallowing the following deductions:
i) Deduction u/s 80IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) was disallowed. According to AO deduction is allowable under section 80IA(4) to an Indian company, if the contract for operating and management is awarded by Central Govt./State
2 ITA No. 1386/Hyd/2017 Sealion Sparkle Port & Terminal Services (Dahej) Ltd., Hd. Govt./local authority/any other statutory body. In the assessee’s case, the contract was awarded by M/s Petronet LNG Ltd. (PLL) which was a private party. Hence, deduction u/s 80IA was denied.
ii) AO had disallowed the consultancy charges paid to PSA Marine Pte Ltd. (PSAM) of Rs. 32,57,220/-. The payment made by the assessee towards consultancy and service charges including legal and professional charges to PSAM as per agreement dated 29/10/2014. AO considered the services provided by PSAM were enumerated in Annexure ‘A’ of the agreement and such services are advisory in nature and did not involve actual carrying out of any operation and there was no necessity to make such payments to PSAM.
Aggrieved with the above order, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the deduction u/s 80IA and the consultancy charges, relying on the decision of the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own cases for AY 2008-09 in ITA Nos. 142/H/2013, order dated 21/06/2013, and for AYs 2007-08 to 2010-11 in ITA No. 1399, 1400/H/13 and 1401/H/13, consolidated order dated 20/02/14.
Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us raising the following grounds of appeal:
The Learned CIT(A) erred on both law and facts of the case. 2. The Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of deduction vi] s.80IA made by the Assessing Officer to the tune of Rs.1,19,496. 3. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions prescribed for claiming the deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. 4. The Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of expenditure, claimed by assessee towards consultancy charges, made by the Assessing Officer to the tune of Rs.32,57,220/-.
3 ITA No. 1386/Hyd/2017 Sealion Sparkle Port & Terminal Services (Dahej) Ltd., Hd. 5. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the observations of the AO that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for the purpose of the business. 6. Any other ground(s) that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 5. The ld. DR relied on the order of AO.
The ld. AR submitted that the disallowances made by the AO were already covered by the assessee’s own case for AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 , 2009-10 and 2010-11 of this coordinate benches in order dated 21/06/13 for AY 2008-09 and consolidated order dated 20/02/2014 for AYs 2007-08, 2009-10 and 2010-11.
We have heard the submissions of the both the parties and perused the orders of revenue authorities as well as other material on record. We find that similar issues came up for consideration before the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2007-08 to 2010-11 (supra) wherein the coordinate bench allowed the assessee’s claims, as raised in this appeal. Copies of the orders of the Tribunal are available on record. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in allowing the grounds raised by the assessee following the decision of the coordinate benches of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2007-08 to 2010-11 (supra) and accordingly, we uphold the order of CIT(A) dismissing the appeal filed by revenue.
In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on 24th January, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated: 24th January, 2018 kv
4 ITA No. 1386/Hyd/2017 Sealion Sparkle Port & Terminal Services (Dahej) Ltd., Hd.
Copy to:-
1) ITO, Ward – 3(1), 7th Floor, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad 2) M/s Sealion Sparkle Port & Terminal Services (Dahej) Ltd., 128, 1st Floor, Srinigar Colony, Hyderabad – 500 073. 3) CIT (A)- 3 , Hyderabad. 4) Pr. CIT – 3, Hyderabad 5) The Departmental Representative, I.T.A.T., Hyderabad.