ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Pasupati Nath Resorts (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1121/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3886 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN KR YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP MOHAN
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income
• Section: 14A; 115JB

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1121/DEL/2016 A.Y. : 2012-13 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 19(3), ROOM NO. 217, 2 ND FLOOR, C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI VS. M/S PASUPATI NATH RESORTS (P) LTD., KHASRA NO. 646-653, CHHATARPUR MANDIR ROAD, CHHATARPUR, NEW DELHI 110 030 (PAN: AAECP0732D) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SH. ARUN KR. YADAV, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. SANDEEP MOHAN, A.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGN ED ORDER DATED 16.12.2015 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-7, NEW DELHI RELE VANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READ AS UNDER: - 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 93,54,106/- MADE BY THE AO U/S. 14A READ WITH RULE 8D TO THE BOOK PROFIT 2 COMPUTED U/S. 115JB OF THE I.T. ACT ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST AND PROCESSING FEE AN ENDURING NATURE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 93,54,016/- MADE BY AO BY APPLYING RULE 8D WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE DIRECTIONS LAID DOWN IN CBDTS CIRCULAR NO. 5/2014 DATED 11.2.2014 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT DISALLOWANCE U/S. 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS TO BE MADE EVEN IF THERE IS NO EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO BE ALLOWED TO ADD ANY FRESH GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND / OR DELETE OR AMEND ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE N OT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED H ERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 4. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND REITE RATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3 5. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS RELI ED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND STATED THAT HE HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING HIS OWN DECISION TAKEN IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE AND DELETED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. HE FURTHER STATED TH AT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 -12, THE DEPARTMENT APPEALED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TR IBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 02.11.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO. 155/DEL/20 16 (AY 2011- 12) IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEMINVEST LTD. CIT (2015) 37 8 ITR 33 (DELHI). THEREFORE, SHE STATED THAT SINCE THE ISSUE I N DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE TRIBUNALS DECISION IN ASSES SEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AS WELL AS THE DECI SION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEM INVEST LTD. CIT (SUPRA) AND REQUESTED THE BENCH TO RESPECTFULLY FOLLO W THE AFORESAID PRECEDENTS AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEV ANT RECORDS, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE TRIBU NALS ORDER DATED 02.11.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 PAS SED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY I N THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING HIS OWN DECISION 4 TAKEN IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ASSESS EES OWN CASE AND DELETED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. WE FURTHER FIND THAT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2011- 12, THE REVENUE APPEALED BEFORE THE ITAT AND THE IT AT, E BENCH, NEW DELHI VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 02.11.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO. 155/DEL/2016 (AY 2011-12) IN ASSESSEES OWN IN THE REVENUES APPEAL HAS DECIDED THE EXACTLY AND SIMILAR ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY HOLDING AS UN DER:- 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF LEARNED DR AND PERUSED RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. IT IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS NO EXEMPT INCOME IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEMINVEST LTD. VS. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (DELHI), WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HELD AS UNDER:- HELD, THAT NO EXEMPTED INCOME WAS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND SINCE THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN DOUBT, NO DISALLOWANCE COULD BE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 7. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, WE NOTE THAT THERE IS NO EXEMPT INCOME IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND, THEREFORE, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COV ERED BY THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. HENCE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ITAT, E BENCH, NEW DELH I DECISION DATED 02.11.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO. 155/DEL/2016 (AY 2011- 12) IN ASSESSEES OWN IN THE REVENUES APPEAL, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE R EVENUE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 06/02/2018. SD/- SD/- [L.P. SAHU] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 06/02/2018 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHE S