DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 13(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI V. LT FOODS LIMITED, SAKET, DELHI

ITA 1917/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which had deleted certain additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 14A and 80IB(11A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contested the CIT(A)'s decision, arguing that the additions were justified. However, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly applied the law and previous judicial decisions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26157 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BALJEET KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT JAIN
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income
• Section: 143(3); 14A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1917/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi Vs. M/s. LT Foods Ltd., Unit No. 134, First Floor, Rectangle-1, Saket District Center, New Delhi PAN: AAACL0259K (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061488408(1), dated 26.02.2024 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. Assessee by Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Aditi Garg, CA Department by Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR Date of hearing 20.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.01.2025 ITA No.1917/Del/2024 2 | P a g e 3. The Revenue raises the following twin substantive grounds in the instant appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,13,02,197/- under section 14A of the Act. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.9,40,32,065/- on account of deduction u/s 80IB(11A) of the Act. 4. We advert to the first and foremost issue herein between the parties that section 14A disallowance amounting to Rs.1,13,02,197/- made in the course of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer on 26.07.2019, wherein, he noticed the assessee’s exempt income of Rs.2,01,571/- representing dividends from mutual funds and share of profit from partnership firm; involving varying sums. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee had already made suo motu disallowance of Rs. 8,33,419/- i.e. more than the exempt income itself, and, therefore, we hereby quote Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.) to conclude that the CIT(A)/NFAC has rightly decided the issue against the department herein. Rejected accordingly. 5. Next comes the second substantive issue between the parties qua the correctness of the CIT(A)’s action reversing assessment ITA No.1917/Del/2024 3 | P a g e findings disallowing the assessee’s section 80IB(11A) deduction claim of Rs.9,40,32,065/-. Learned counsel takes us to the assessee’s case-law paper-book running into 148 pages wherein it has already succeeded on the very issue in assessment years 2007- 08 to 2009-10 and 2016-17. 6. That being the case, we are of the considered view that once the department is fair enough in not pinpointing any distinction on facts and on law in all these assessment years dealing with the assessee’s section 80IB(1A) deduction claim, we adopt judicial consistency to reject the Revenue’s instant latter substantive ground as well. Ordered accordingly. 7. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20th January, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "