United Leasing & Industries Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, Ward- 27(1), New Delhi

ITA 1004/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1278 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: Y K SHARMA
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1004/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 UNITED LEASING & INDUSTRIES LTD., VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, D-41, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART-II, WARD 27(1), NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (PAN:AAACU0323M) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. Y.K. SHARMA, CA REVENUE BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR. ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 22.11.2018 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-9, NEW DELHI RE LATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND:- THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN DECLINING TO ACCEPT THE CLAIM/REQUEST OF THE APPELLANT TO REDUCE/WITHDRAW THE SUO MOTO DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT OF RS. 8,50,094/- WHILE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND ON RECEIPT OF AND IN PURSUANCE TO THE DECISION 2 OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S HOLCIM INDIA PVT. LTD., 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SUP PORTING THE CLAIMS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE A UTHORITY. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUE REGARDING THE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 14A READ WITH SECTION 8D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE SAME FRESH AS PER LAW AS WELL AS PER THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HOLCIM INDI A P. LTD 272 CTR 542 (DEL.) AND CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (DEL.) 3. ON THE CONTRARY, LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY AND DID NOT SERIOUSLY OPPOSED THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RE LEVANT RECORD SPECIALLY ORDER PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY AND I AM OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE REQUEST OF THE LEAR NED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS GENUINE AND SHOULD BE ACCEPTED THEREFOR E, I ACCEPT THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SET ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE SAME FRESH AS PER LAW AND AS PER THE DECISIONS OF CIT VS. HOLCIM INDIA P. LTD 272 CTR 542 (DEL.) AND CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (DEL.). 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 17/12/2019. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 17/12/2019 SH COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES