M/s Monster.com (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1514/Hyd/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0286 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-02-2019
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V S T SAI
• Assessee Lawyers: B SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction; TDS
• Section: 37(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B , HYDERABAD BEFORE S HRI P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S . RIFAUR RAHMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S .NO. ITA NO. AY APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1 & 2 1513/H/17 & 1514/H/17 2012 - 13 & 2013 - 14 M/S MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., HYD. PAN - AACCM3695G DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), HYD. 3 & 4 1530/H/17 & 1599/H/17 2012 - 13 & 2013 - 14 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), HYD. M/S MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., HYD. PAN - AACCM3695G ASSES SE E BY : SHRI B. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY REVENUE BY : SHRI Y.V.S.T. SAI DATE OF HEARING : 2 1 - 0 2 - 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 - 0 3 - 201 9 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. : THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 4 (IN SHORT CIT(A)) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 201 2 - 1 3 AND 201 3 - 1 4 . AS IDENTICAL ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, THEY WERE CLUBBED AND HEARD TOGETH ER AND, THEREFORE, A COMMON ORDER IS PASSED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H /1 7 BY ASSESSEE AND ITA NO. 1530 /H/1 5 BY THE REVENUE FOR AY 20 1 2 - 13 . 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY , ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING ONLINE RECRUITMENT SERVICES , I T 2 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 201 2 - 1 3 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3 4 , 87 ,9 7 , 870 / - . THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND AFTER EXAMINING ALL THE DETAILS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS AND ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS. 107,35,91,074 / - . 1. ACCRUED INCOME SHOWN AS U NMATURED ADVANCES IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF RS. 72,29,49,959 / - . 2. ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENT U/S 92CA OF RS. 18,43,250/ - 3. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ABOVE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AGAINST THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF ACCRUED INCOME SHOWN AS UNMATURED ADVANCES AND ARMS LENGTH PRICE ADJUSTMENT U/S 92CA OF THE ACT. 4. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE OF TAXING OF ACCRUED INCOME SHOWN AS UNMATURED ADVANCES IN THE BALANCE SHEET, THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR S , DELETED THE AD DITION MADE BY THE AO. 5. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS, THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION ON AC COUNT OF UNMATURED ADVANCES AND THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. 7. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,43,250/ - BEING THE MARK UP OF 10% ON THE REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES OF RS . 1,84,32,503/ - , THE TPO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED A SUM OF RS. 1,84,32,503/ - AS REIMBURSEMENT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT HAD EXPENDED CERTAIN SUMS DURING THE YEAR WHICH IT HAD SUBSEQUENTLY SOUGHT REIMBURSEMENT FROM ITS AES. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THIS EXPENDITURE WA S INCURRED ONLY AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE. THE TPO 3 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CONFIRMED THAT THESE REIMBURSEMENTS WERE NOT ROUTED THROUGH P&L A/C OF THE ASSESSEE. 7.1 AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE TPO OBSERVED THAT THE RECEIPT OF REIMBURSEMENT WAS NOT ROUTED THROUGH BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND NO INDEPENDENT PARTY WOULD RENDER SUCH SERVICES WITHOUT ANY MARK UP. FURTHER, HE OBSERVED THAT, EVEN OTHERWISE , RECOVERY OF EXPENSES ALWAYS FORMS PART OF OPERATING COST IN THE CASE OF INDEPENDENT COMPARABLE COMPANIES. HE, THUS, OPINED THAT THESE EXPENSES OUGHT TO BE MARKED UP SUITABLY TO COMPENSATE FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED. THEREFORE, THE TPO HELD THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWING A MARK UP OF 10% ON SOFTWARE CHARGES PAID TO THE AE, THESE SOFTWARE CHARGES ARE IN THE NATURE OF SERVICES RENDERED BY THE AE, THUS, CUP IS AVAILABLE AND ACCORDINGLY THE REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED ARE ALSO MARKED UP AT 10% AS UNDER: REIMBU RSEMENT RECEIVED RS. 1,84,32,503 ALP OF REIMBURSEMENT @ 110% RS. 2,02,75,753 ADJUSTMENT ON REIMBURSEMENT RS. 18,43,250 THUS, THE ARMS LENGTH PRICE OF THE ASSESSEE IS RS. 2,02,75,753/ - AND THE SHORT F ALL OF RS. 18,43,250/ - IS TREATED AS ADJUSTMENT U/S 92CA OF THE ACT. 8. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE AP PELLANT. IT WAS OBSERVED T HAT ALL THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT WERE ALR EADY CONSIDERED BY THE TPO IN HIS ORDER DATED 30 - 01 - 2016. IN THIS ORDER, THE O CONCLUDED THAT, EVEN THOUGH REIMBURSEMENT ARE NOT ROUTED THROUGH P & L COUNT, THESE EXPENSES ARE TO BE MARKED UP SUITABLY TO COM PENSATE FOR THE SE RVICES RENDERED AND THEREFORE AS PER CUP METHOD, THE REIMBURSEMENT RE CEIVED ARE MARKED UP AT 10%. THEREFORE, THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT IN IS REGARD ARE NOT CONSIDERED AND I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THE TPO ON THE SAID AD DITION. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE IN THIS REGARD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONFIRMED. 4 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 9. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 10. CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD . THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2010 - 11 IN ITA NO. 1425/HYD/2015 AND OTHERS VIDE ORDER DATED 30/08/2017 WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER: 18. AS REGARDS GROUND NOS. 11 & 12 REGARDING MARK UP OF 27.90% ON THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES RECEIVED OF RS. 12,96,481/ - , THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT HYDERABAD IN THE CASE OF MYLAN LABORATORIES LTD., (FORMERLY MATRIX LABORATORIES LTD.) IN ITA NO. 66/HYD/2013 FOR AY 2008 - 09 VIDE ORDER DATED 01/01/2014, WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH HAS HELD AS UNDER: 31. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS ISSUE REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER/TP O IN DETAIL WHETHER THE SAID AMOUNT CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES ARE INDEED REIMBURSEMENT OR NOT. IN CASE OF REIMBURSEMENT AT COST OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON BEHALF OF THE AES AND HAS NOT FORMED PART OF THE EXPENDI TURE CLAIMED AS OPERATING COST OF THE ASSESSEE THEN, THE REIMBURSEMENT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF ASSESSEE'S SALES. THE AMOUNTS SHOULD BE EXCLUDED IN COMPUTING THE OPERATING PROFITS. SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED AND IT IS ALSO NOT ON RECORD WHETHER THE SAID EXPENDITURE WAS NOT PART OF CLAIM UNDER SECTION 37(1) OF THE I.T. ACT IN THE REGULAR COMPUTATION OR NOT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE TPO TO EXAMINE THE FACTS AND TO EXCLUDE ONLY IN THE CASE THE SAID AMOUNT IS REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENDITURE AND THERE WAS NO CLAIM BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS COMPUTATION OF INCOME. AS THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS MATERIALLY IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE SAID CASE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH, WE REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE AO/TPO TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN LINE WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE SAID CASE. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 11. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE OF TAXING OF ACCRUED INCOME SHOWN AS UNMATURED ADV ANCES IN THE BALANCE SHEET , RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL (GROUND NOS. 1 & 2) , THE AO ADDED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 72,29,49,959/ - BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND THEREFORE THE COMPANY HAS TO OFFER ENT IRE AMOUNT AS RECEIPTS AND PROVIDE PROVISION FOR EXPENSES TO BE INCURRED, IF ANY. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. THE ADVANCES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALREADY ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THESE ARE NOT REFUNDABLE RECEIPTS. AS PER NOTES TO ACCOUNTS AT POI NT NO.2, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT UNMATURED INCOME INCLUDES THE AMOUNT WHEREOF HAS NOT BEEN LINKED AND IDENTIFIED WIT H THE INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMERS - CONTRACTS IN VIEW OF VOLUMES AND HETEROGENEOUS NATURE OF CONTRACTS. BESIDES, THERE ARE NO UNIFORM PAYMENT TERMS IN THE VARIETY OF CONTRACTS ENTERED INTO DURING THE YEAR. THIS, HOWEVER, DOES NOT IMPACT INCOME ACCRUAL AND DISCLOS URE IN THE BALANCE SHEET EXCEPT IN CASE OF DEBTORS TO THE EXTENT OF AMOUNT NOT SO DETERMINED.' THIS NOTE TO THE ACCOUNTS CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE INCOME IS ALREADY ACCRUED IN RESPECT OF THESE ADVANCES. 2. THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY WAS REQUESTED TO SUBMIT CO NFIRMATIONS FROM THE COMPANIES FROM WHOM THESE ADVANCES ARE RECEIVED TO SHOW THAT THESE AMOUNTS ARE APPEARING AS LIABILITIES IN THEIR BALANCE SHEET TO PROVE THE POINT THAT THIS INCOME IS NOT ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IF THE PAYING COMPANY DEBITS THE FULL EX PENDITURE ON THESE PAYMENTS, THE RECEIVING COMPANY CANNOT SHOW PART OF THE AMOUNT AS RECEIPT AND PART OF THE AMOUNT AS ADVANCE. THE EXAMINATION OF AGREEMENT COPIES ENTERED BY ASSESSEE WITH OTHERS FOR PROVIDING ON - LINE SERVICES, CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE IN COME IS ALREADY ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO CLAUSE FOR REFUND OF THESE ADVANCES IN THE AGREEMENTS ENTERED BY THE ASSE S SEE WITH OTHERS. 3. THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY IS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND THEREFORE, THE COMPANY HAS TO OFFER T HE ENTIRE AMOUNT AS RECEIPTS AND PROVIDE FOR PROVISION FOR EXPENSES TO BE INCURRED, IF ANY, IN RESPECT OF THESE AMOUNTS BASED ON SOME SCIENTIFIC METHOD OR PAST EXPERIENCE AND IT CANNOT POSTPONE THE ENTIRE AMOUNTS TO THE SUBSEQUENT PERIOD ON THE GROUND THAT THE PERIOD OF SERVICE IS NOT YET COMPLETED. THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY ALREADY DEBITED HUGE DIRECT OR INDIRECT EXPENSES ON THESE RECEIPTS AND POSTPONEMENT OF ALL THESE RECEIPTS RESULTS IN DISTORTION OF TRUE PROFITS. 6 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 4. WHATEVER BE THE METHOD FOLLOWED, RECOGNITION OF REVENUE HAS TO BE IN CONSONANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING SO FOLLOWED VIS - - VIS THE NATURE AND CHARACTER OF THE AMOUNT ACCRUED OR RECEIVED AND THE YEAR OF SUCH A CCRUAL OR RECEIPT [STATE BANK OF TRAVANC O RE 158 ITR 102 (SC)]. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS THE POWER TO ADOPT THE CORRECT METHOD OF VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK INSTEAD OF WRONG METHOD ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A LONG PERIOD. METHOD OF STOCK VALUATION FOLLOWED SHOULD NOT ONLY BE CONSISTENT BUT SHO ULD ALSO BE CORRECT. BRITISH PAINTS INDIA LIMITED 188 ITR 44 (SC). ACCORDINGLY, THE UNMATURED INCOME OF RS. 72,29,49,959/ - IS TREATED AS ASSESSEES INCOME AND ACCORDINGLY ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME RETURNED. 12 . THE CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 13 . AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 1 4 . BEFORE US, THE LD. DR HAS CONCEDED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DE CISION OF ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WHILE, THE LD. AR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 1 5 . CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, HYDE RABAD IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO. 1762/HYD/11, FOR AY 2007 - 08, ORDER DATED 31/03/2017 WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH OBSERVED AS UNDER: 11. CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. T HE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, HYDERABAD IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO. 1081/HYD/04, FOR AY 2001 - 02, ORDER DATED 10/08/2007 WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH OBSERVED AS UNDER: IN THE SECOND GROUND, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE DELETION OF THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS. IT WAS NOTED BY THE AO THAT AS PER TWO TDS CERTIFICATES, THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED PROFESSIONAL FEES AGGREGATING TO RS. 1,39,125 (RS. 1,18,125 + 21,000). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN TOTAL RECEIPTS OF RS. 60,558/ - ONLY. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IT FOLLOWS MERCANTILE SYSTEM O F ACCOUNTING AND UNDER THE SAID SYSTEM, IT RECOGNIZES THE 7 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. REVENUE ON THE BAS I S OF PROPORTIONATE COMPLETION METHOD WHICH IS RECOGNIZED BY THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA (ICAI) IN ITS ACCOUNTING STANDARD OF REVENUE RECOGNITION. UNDER THIS METHOD, REVENUE IS RECOGNIZED PROPORTIONATELY BY REFERENCE TO THE PERFORMANCE O F EACH ACT. THE REVENUE RECOGNIZED UNDER THIS METHOD WOULD BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF CONTRACT VALUE, ASSOCIATE COST, NUMBER OF ACTS OR OTHER SUITABLE BASIS. WHEN SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY A N INDETERMINATE NUMBER OF ACTS OV ER A PERIOD OF TIME, REVENUE IS RECOGNIZED ON A STRAIGHT LINE BASIS OVER THE S PECI FIC PERIOD. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE SAID ACCOUNTING STANDARD HAS NOT BEEN NOTIFIED RECOGNIZED BY THE CBDT UNDER S .145(2) OF THE IT ACT 1961 (THE ACT), THE RECEIPTS HAV E TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR ON THE BASIS OF TDS CERTIFICATES. ACCORDINGLY, THE AMOUNT OF RS.78,567 WAS ADDED AS DIFFERENCE IN PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS. THE CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE HYDERABAD BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL IN THE CASE OF BHARAT TELEVISION LTD. IN ITA NO.1797/HYD/89 AND OF THE MADRAS BENCH IN THE CASE OF SAKURA ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HA S ACCOUNTED FOR ONLY PROPORTIONAL RECEIPT, CREDIT FOR THE ENTIRE TDS CANNOT BE ALLOWED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED COUNSEL SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). WHETHER A PARTICULAR ACCOUNTING ST A NDARD HAS BEEN NOTIFIED OR NOT IS NOT MATERIAL. WHAT IS TO BE SEEN IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FOLLOWED A RECOGNIZED METHOD OF ACCOUNTING OR NOT. IF METHOD FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE IS SUCH WHEREBY CORRECT INCOME CANNOT BE DEDUCED, THEN ONLY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT A REASONA BLE BASIS TO DETERMINE THE TOTAL INCOME. IN THE INSTANT CASE,. IT CANNOT BE DISPUTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FOLLOWED A RECOGNIZED METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND HENCE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF ADDING ANY FUR THER AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THERE BEING NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), WE UPHOLD THE SAME. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT AND, ACCORDINGLY , WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL. 1 5 .1 AS THE ISSUE IN THE AY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS MATERIALLY IDENTICAL TO THAT OF AY 2007 - 08, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 8 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ITA NO. 150 9/H/1 6 FOR AY 201 3 - 1 4 BY THE REVENU E AND ITA NO. 1175 /H/1 6 FOR AY 20 1 3 - 1 4 BY THE ASSESSEE . 16 . AS REGARDS GROUND NOS. 1& 2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE REGARDING ACCRUED INCOME SHOWN AS UNMATURED ADVANCES AMOUNTING TO RS. 7 9 ,6 8 , 24 , 058 , SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN D ECIDED BY US IN AY 2 01 2 - 1 3 IN REVENUES APPEAL VIDE PARA NO. 1 5 (SUPRA) . AS THE ISSUE IS MATERIALLY IDENTICAL TO THAT OF AY 20 1 2 - 1 3 , FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN THEREIN, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING THE SAID ADDITION AND ACCORDINGLY, DI SMISS THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 17 . THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN AY 201 3 - 1 4 ARE SIMILAR TO THE GROUNDS RAISED IN AY 201 2 - 1 3 , FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN THEREIN, WE REMIT ALL THE GROUNDS TO THE FILE OF THE AO/TPO TO DECIDE THE SAME IN LINE WITH THE DIRE CTIONS GIVEN IN AY 201 2 - 1 3 . THUS, ALL THE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 18 . TO SUM UP, REVENUE APPEALS IN AY 201 2 - 1 3 & 201 3 - 1 4 ARE DISMISSED AND THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE IN AY 201 2 - 1 3 AND 201 3 - 1 4 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH MARCH , 201 9 SD/ - SD/ - ( P. MADHAVI DEVI ) (S . RIFAUR RAHMAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 29 TH MARCH , 201 9 KV 9 ITA NO. 1 5 13 /H/ 1 7 AND OTHERS MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD. COPY TO: - 1. M/S MONSTER.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 8 - 2 - 293 /82A11204 & 1201/1, ROAD NO. 45, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD. 2 . DCIT, CIRCLE 16(2), 7 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A) 4 , HYDERABAD 4 . PR. CIT - 4 , HYD. 5 . DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6 . GUARD FILE