" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.6939/Del/2019 & 1694/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 AT Kearney Ltd., 7th Floor, Tower-D, Global Business Park, Mehrauli, Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi PAN: AADCA0861H (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.6939/Del/2019 and 1694/Del/2022 for assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17, arise against DCIT, International Taxation, New Delhi’s and CIT(A), Delhi’s order dated 27.06.2019 and 30.05.2022 having DIN and order nos. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1016531599(1) and ITBA/APL/S/250/2022-23/1043250655(1), involving proceedings Assessee by Sh. Sparsh Bhargava, Adv. Ms. Ishita Farasiya, Adv. Ms. Vanshika Taneja, Adv. Department by Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 13.03.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.03.2025 ITA No.6939/Del/2019 & 1694/Del/2022 2 | P a g e under section 143(3) and 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. 3. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. 4. The assessee’s “lead” appeal ITA No. 6939/Del/2019 for the former assessment year 2015-16 raises the following substantive grounds: 1. That in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi('the Ld. AO') has erred in disallowing the losses on assessed basis rather than allowing losses as per returned basis. 1.1. That AYs 2012-13 and 2014-15 for which losses have been claimed are still pending for adjudication before your honors. 1.2. That in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in ignoring the fact that the transfer pricing issues involved in all years and pending with the appellate authority are repetitive in nature and the Your Honors have already passed an order for AY 2008-09 deleting the entire additions made on similar grounds made by the Ld. AO. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice and notwithstanding each other. Any consequential relief, to which the Appellant may be entitled under the law in pursuance of the aforesaid grounds of appeal, or otherwise, may be thus granted. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 5. Both the learned representatives are very much ad idem during the course of hearing that the assessee’s sole substantive grievances raised in the instant twin appeals is that of adjustment ITA No.6939/Del/2019 & 1694/Del/2022 3 | P a g e of it’s brought-forward losses involving varying sums; assessment years-wise, respectively. 6. Faced with this situation, we sought to know about the penalty of the relevant proceedings in the preceding assessment years wherein it is informed from both sides that the assessee’s corresponding appeals in the preceding assessment years stand decided against the department. And that the learned lower authorities had made transfer pricing adjustment(s) involving intra-group services which stand deleted upto to this tribunal and upheld in hon’ble jurisdiction high court as well. Learned counsel has filed hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s recent common judgment in the assessee’s cases for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14, dated 21st March, 2024 upholding the tribunal’s common order dated 14th September, 2021 to this effect. The assessee has further filed its written synopsis giving a list of the Revenue’s cases as well pending before their lordships stated to be coming up for hearing on 3rd April, 2025. We, therefore, deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant identical sole substantive grievance in both these assessment years back to the learned Assessing Officer to frame ITA No.6939/Del/2019 & 1694/Del/2022 4 | P a g e his afresh appropriate computation, as per law after taking into consideration all the foregoing intervening developments, after affording adequate opportunity of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 7. We made it clear before parting that the given fact that the assessee is aggrieved on the issue of adjustment of its brought- forward losses declined in the lower authorities’ respective orders; and therefore it is deemed appropriate at this stage to restore the same back to Assessing Officer, in the forgoing terms. 8. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.6939/Del/2019 and 1694/Del/2022 are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26th March, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "