SHROFF PROCESSED FOODS & COLD STORAGE P. LTD MUMBAI vs DCIT CIR 1(3) MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘E’ MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL, JUDICIALMEMBER & SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.2773/Mum/2011 – A.Y 2001-02 Shroff Processed Foods & Cold Storage Pvt.

Ltd., Madina Mansion, Musafir Khan Road, Mumbai 400 001.

PAN: AAACS 7815 G Vs.

Dy.

Commissioner of I.T., Circle 1(3), Mumbai. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri K.K.Ved.

Respondent by : Shri B.Jaya Kumar.

Date of Hearing: 09-02-2012.

Date of Pronouncement: 09-02-2012.

O R D E R Per T.R.SOOD, AM: In this appeal various grounds have been raised involving three disputes, namely, (i) passing of an ex parte order by the Ld.

CIT(A), (ii) deduction u/s.80HHC and (iii) MAT credit u/s.115JAA.

2.

Before us Ld.

Counsel of the assessee submitted that recently this issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports vs.

CIT, Civil Appeal No.1699 of 2012 wherein the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs.

Kalpataru Colour & Chemical [328 ITR 461] has been reversed and, therefore, matter has to be restored to the file of the AO to work out the deduction in terms of this decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

ITA NO.2773 OF 2011 2 He further pointed out that in view of this decision ground No.1 regarding ex parte order by the CIT(A) becomes infructuous and ground No.3 regarding MAT credit u/s.115JAA is of consequential nature.

3.

On the other hand, Ld.

DR relied on the order of the CIT(A).

4.

After considering the rival submissions, we find that Hon'ble Supreme Court has reversed the decision of CIT vs.

Kalpataru Colour & Chemical [supra] and has restored the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal.

Therefore, we set aside the order of the ld.

CIT(A) and remit the matter to the file of the AO with a direction to re-examine the same in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case.

As pointed out by the Ld.

Counsel of the assessee ground No. ground No.1 has become infructuous and accordingly same is dismissed being infructuous.

Ground No.3 is of consequential nature which is restored to the file of the AO for reconsideration.

5.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on this day of 9/2/2012.

Sd/- Sd/- (B.R.MITTAL) (T.R.SOOD) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai: 9-2-2012.

P/-*