M/s. Pranidhi Holdings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2054/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4329 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 05-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK GARG SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: K C SINGHAL ITP
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Depreciation; Additional evidence
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2054/DEL./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) M/S. PRANIDHI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., VS. ITO, (NOW KNOWN AS PLUS CORPORATE VENTURES PVT. LTD.) W ARD 14 (4), L 7, GREEN PARK EXTENSION, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI 110 016. (PAN : AACCP7899K) ITA NO.2222/DEL./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITO, VS. M/S. PRANIDHI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., WARD 14 (4), (NOW KNOWN AS PLUS CORPORATE VENTUR ES PVT. LTD.) NEW DELHI. L 7, GREEN PARK EXTENSION, NEW DELHI 110 016. (PAN : AACCP7899K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.C. SINGHAL, ITP REVENUE BY : SHRI DEEPAK GARG, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 26.09.2017 DATE OF ORDER : 03.10.2017 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : PRESENT CROSS APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE REVENUE ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF CONSOLIDAT ED ORDER TO AVOID REPETITION OF DISCUSSION. ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 2 2. THE APPELLANT, M/S. PRANIDHI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY), BY FILING T HE PRESENT APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.01. 2014 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-XVII, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA T HAT :- 1. THAT DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE 1. T. ACT 196 1 IS ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION IN AS MUCH AS SATI SFACTION CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE ABOVE SECTION HAD NOT BEEN RECORDED BY THE AO BEFORE INVOKING THE PROVISIONS O F SAID SECTION. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN REJECTI NG THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE EXPENDITUR E INCURRED IN RELATION TO THE BUSINESS OF DEALING IN SHARES CANNOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 14A OF THE I. T. ACT 1961 IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE KARNATKA HC IN THE CASE OF CCI LTD. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE FOLLO WED THE SAID JUDGMENT. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS, THE LD. CLT (A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW IN NOT EXCLUDING T HE INTEREST RELATABLE TO SHARES ON WHICH NO DIVIDEND W AS RECEIVED PARTICULARLY WHEN HER PREDECESSOR HAD EXCL UDED SUCH INTEREST WHILE COMPUTING DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A IN THE PRECEDING YEAR. THE DISALLOWANCE, IF ANY, COULD BE RESTRICTED ONLY TO INTEREST IN RELATION TO SHARES O N WHICH DIVIDEND WAS RECEIVED AND NOT THE ENTIRE INTEREST. 4. THAT RULE 8D (I) PROVIDES THAT INTEREST DIRECTLY RELATABLE TO EXEMPTED INCOME IS TO BE DETERMINED BU T THE CIT (A) FAILED TO MAKE SUCH EXERCISE. 5. THAT NO PART DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION COULD BE MADE IN RESPECT OF FLAT PURCHASED. 3. THE APPELLANT, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 14 (4), NEW DELHI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE REVENUE), BY FILI NG THE PRESENT APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 30.01.2014 ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 3 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-XVII, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE GROUNDS INTER AL IA THAT :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO EXCLUDE STOCK I N TRADE OF SHARES FROM INVESTMENT FOR WORKING OUT 'AVERAGE OF INVESTMENTS' FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER RULE 8D(III) WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONS' 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 CRORE AND R S.19.45 LAKHS MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN RESPECT OF M/S. UDGAM COMMERCIAL LTD AND M/S. ONE TOUCH SOLUTION INDIA PVT LTD. IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE ONUS OF ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS LIES WITH THE ASSESSEE AND NOT ON THE AO. 4. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED FORM THE BALANCE SHEET THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBSTANTIA L INVESTMENT AS WELL AS STOCK-IN-TRADE AND HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCO ME AMOUNTING TO RS.44,14,607/- AND HAS SUO MOTU DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS.4,13,678/- UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) AND PROCEEDED TO DISALLOW AN AMOUN T OF RS.55,31,601/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 (FOR SHORT THE RULES). AO FURTHER PROCEEDED TO MADE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,000/- AND RS.19,45,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF TAKING UNSECURED LOAN FROM M/S. UDGAM ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 4 COMMERCIAL LIMITED AND M/S. ONE TOUCH SOLUTION INDI A PVT. LTD. RESPECTIVELY. 5. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF FILING APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF R S.55,31,601/- U/S 14A READ WITH RULE 8D BUT DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,000/- AND RS.19,45,000/- MADE BY THE AO AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS. FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE A SSESSEE COMPANY AS WELL AS REVENUE HAVE COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING CROSS APPEALS. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NO.2054/DEL/2014 (FILED BY THE ASSESSEE) GROUNDS NO.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 7. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE BY RELYING UPON THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE CITED AS CHEMINVEST LTD. VS. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (DEL.) AND HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN CASE CITED AS PR.CIT VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA (2017) 391 ITR 218 (P&H) CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INTO THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN SHARES AND HAS S UO MOTU ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 5 DISALLOWED AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,13,678/- U/S 14A ON TH E EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.44,14,607/- AND THE AO WITHOU T RECORDING HIS DIS-SATISFACTION MADE FURTHER DISALLOWANCE OF R S.55,31,601/- AND AS SUCH RULE 8D IS NOT APPLICABLE. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IN CASE RULE 8D IS FOUND TO BE NOT APPLICABLE THEN ONLY TAXABLE INCOME CAN BE TAXED. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE TO REPEL THE ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BY THE LD. AR THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF APPLI ED THE RULE 8D, IT CANNOT CHALLENGE THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 8. ASSESSEE BY SUO MOTU DISALLOWED THE AMOUNT OF RS.4,13,678/- U/S 14A AS PER COMPUTATION GIVEN BEFO RE AO AS UNDER:- 1 EXPENDITURE DIRECTLY RELATING TO INCOME 2 EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR INCOME OR RECEIPT A) FINANCIAL CHARGES B) AVERAGE VALUE OF INVESTMENT, INCOME FROM WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF TOTAL INCOME 18,56,508.00 ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 6 OPENING INVESTMENT CLOSING INVESTMENT C) AVERAGE VALUE OF TOTAL ASSETS IN THE BALANCE OPENING ASSETS CLOSING ASSETS 3 1/2% OF AVG. INVESTMENT TOTAL 344,85,096.31 172,42,548.16 2,460,53,382.21 1,668,85,804.48 2,064,69,593.35 155,039.43 258,638.22 413,677.65 9. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND, AO PROCEEDED TO COMP UTE THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER RULE 8D(2)(II) BY TAKING AVERAGE INVESTMENT AT RS.10,70,21,956/- AS AGAINST THE AVERAGE INVESTMENT TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1,72,42,548.16, AS UNDER :- 5. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF AVER AGE INVESTMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATION DISALLOW ANCE U/S 14A R. W.R. 8D IS CALCULATED AS UNDER:- RS. INVESTMENT AS ON 01.04.2008 (TOTAL INVESTMENTS - SHARE APPLICATION MONEY- INVESTMENT IN LAND) 5,44,85,097/- STOCK IN TRADE COMPRISING OF SHARES 10,11,85,153/- 15,56,70,250/- INVESTMENT AS ON 31.04.2003 (TOTAL INVESTMENTS - SHARE APPLICATION MONEY- INVESTMENT IN LAND) 3,67,77,200/- ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 7 STOCK IN TRADE COMPRISING OF SHARES 2, 15,96,463/- 5,83, 73,663/- AVERAGE INVESTMENTS 10,70,21,956/- 6. FURTHER, IN ITS COMPUTATION OF DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST EXPEN DITURE AT RS.18,56,508/- ONLY WHICH HAS BEEN PAID TO THE T HREE UNSECURED LOAN CREDITORS. HOWEVER, IT HAS OMITTED T O TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE INTEREST PAID TO TWO BROKER CONCER NS M/S. AASHMAVIR FINANCE (P) LTD. (RS.51,24,847-) AND M/S. EDLWEISS SECURITIES LTD. (RS.25,56,060/-). THE ASSE SSEE HAS CAMOUFLAGED INTEREST AMOUNTING @ RS.76,80,907/- PAI D TO THESE TWO BROKER CONCERNS UNDER FINANCE CHARGES, WH EREAS, THESE ARE NOTHING BUT INTEREST CHARGES PAID TO THES E TWO CONCERNS. AS THE ASSESSEE IS HOLDING SUBSTANTIAL AV ERAGE STOCK-IN-TRADE (CONSISTING OF SHARES) AMOUNTING TO APPROX RS.6.14 CRORES WHICH ARE ALSO TO BE INCLUDED IN INV ESTMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATING DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A , THE FINANCE CHARGES PAID TO THESE TWO BROKER CONCERNS C AN NOT BE EXCLUDED FROM THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST INCURRED IN RELATION TO THE EARNING OF EXEMPT DIVIDEND INCOME F ROM INVESTMENTS AND STOCK-IN-TRADE. HENCE, TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.95,37,415/- IS BEING TAKEN AS INTEREST EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE YEAR WHICH CAN NOT BE SPECIFICALLY AND D IRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR INCOME OR RECEIPT FO R CALCULATING DISALLOWANCE UNDER RULE 80(2)(II). S.NO. HEAD PARTICULARS AMOUNT (RS.) (I) EXPENSES DIRECTLY RELATABLE TO INCOME IN TOTAL INCOME 50% OF BANK/DEMAT CHARGES DEBITED TO P&L ACCOUNT 52,845 DISALLOWANCE UNDER (I) 52,845 (II) INTEREST PAID NOT DIRECTLY RELATABLE TO ANY (A) INTEREST PAID OTHER THAN INCL. (I) ABOVE 95,37,415 ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 8 INCOME (B) INVESTMENTS AS ON 01.04.2008 15,56,70,250 (C) INVESTMENTS AS ON 31.03.2009 5,83,73,663 (D) AVERAGE VALUE OF INVESTMENTS 10,70,21,956 (E) TOTAL ASSETS OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 01.04.2008 24,60,53,381 (F) TOTAL ASSETS OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009 16,68,85,802 (G) AVERAGE OF TOTAL ASSETS OF BALANCE SHEET 20,64,69,592 DISALLOWANCE UNDER (II) 49,43,647 (III) 0.5% OF THE AVERAGE VALUE OF INVESTMENT RS.10,70,21,956 X 0.50% = RS.5,35,109 5,35,109 DISALLOWANCE UNDER (III) 5,35,109 AGGREGATE DISALLOWANCE U/R 8D R.W.S. 14A FOR AY 2009-10 55,31,601 10. ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT IT HELD THE SHARES A S STOCK-IN-TRADE AND DIVIDEND INCOME WAS ONLY THE BYE-PRODUCT OF THE TRADING ACTIVITY AND AS SUCH, THERE IS NO RELATION BETWEEN THE EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST AND EXEMPTED INCOME AND THAT ALL THE QUOTED SHARES HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS STOCK-IN-TRADE AND UNQUOT ED SHARES AS INVESTMENT BECAUSE THERE IS NO READY MARKET AVAILAB LE FOR UNQUOTED ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 9 SHARES. TO REPLY THIS QUESTION, THE AO RELIED UPON THE DECISION RENDERED BY DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE CIT ED AS VIDYUT INVESTMENT 910 SOT 284. 11. HOWEVER, HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN JUDGMENT CITED AS PR.CIT VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA (SUPRA) SET THIS ISSUE AT REST BY HOLDING THAT WHEN ASSESSEE HAS NOT HELD SECURITIES TO EARN DIVIDEND OR INTEREST BUT TRADED IN THEM AND DIVIDEND OR INTEREST ACCRUING THEREON WAS ONLY A BYE-PRODUCT TH EREON OR AN INCIDENTAL BENEFIT ARISING THEREOF, THE SAME WOULD NOT BE SUBJECTED TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. 12. HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CHEMINVEST LTD. VS. CIT (SUPRA) ALSO HELD THAT TO ATTRACT SECTION 14A, THER E SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACTUAL RECEIPT OF INCOME WHICH IS NOT INCLUDIB LE IN TOTAL INCOME AND SECTION 14A WILL NOT APPLY WHERE NO EXEM PT INCOME IS RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. 13. BOTH THE JUDGMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE ARE APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND THE ISSUE IS REQUIRED TO BE DECIDED AFRESH BY THE AO BY KEEPI NG IN MIND THAT THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN STOCK-IN-TRADE AND I NVESTMENT. IN CASE, MOTIVE BEHIND SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IS TO EARN PROFIT THEN THE SAME CANNOT BE TREATED AS TRADING PROFIT A ND WHEN THE OBJECT IS TO DERIVE INCOME BY WAY OF DIVIDEND THEN THE PROFIT WOULD ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 10 HAVE BEEN ACCRUED FROM THE INVESTMENT AS HAS BEEN C LARIFIED BY CIRCULAR NO.18 DATED 02.11.2015. ALL THESE FACTS A RE REQUIRED TO BE VERIFIED BY THE AO AND THEN DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACC ORDANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT CITED AS CHEMINVEST LTD. VS. CIT AND PR.CIT VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA (SUPRA). CONSEQUENTLY, GROUNDS NO.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 ARE DETERMINED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. RESULTANTLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.2222/DEL/2014 (FILED BY THE REVENUE) GROUNDS NO.1, 2 & 3 14. AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,000/- AND RS.19,45,000/- AS UNSECURED CASH CREDIT CLAIMED AS UNSECURED LOAN AVAILED OF BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S. UDGAM COMMERCI AL LIMITED AND M/S. ONE TOUCH SOLUTION INDIA PVT. LTD. RESPECT IVELY ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH, ADDRESS , PAN OF THE CREDITORS. 15. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE SOUGHT TO BRING ON RECORD ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNT; CO PY OF BANK STATEMENT OF M/S. UDGAM COMMERCIAL (P) LTD. (LENDER ); COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY REFLECTING THE TRANSACTIONS; COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN FILED BY TH E LENDER FOR THE ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 11 AY 2009-10; COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSO CIATION OF THE LENDER; AND COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIALS OF T HE LENDER FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 ST MARCH 2009, BY MOVING AN APPLICATION U/S 46A. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, LD. CIT (A) CALLED REMAN D REPORT FROM THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 18.03.2013 AND THEN ISSUED REMINDER DATED 31.07.2013 AND THEN AGAIN ISSUED REMINDER FOR 30.10.2013 TO FILE HIS COMMENT BY 11.11.2013. BUT ON FAILURE OF THE AO, THE LD. CIT (A) ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED UNDE R RULE 46A. 16. IT IS SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS CO- TERMINUS POWERS TO CONDUCT A DISCREET ENQUIRY AS TO THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTION S. FROM THE DOCUMENTS BROUGHT ON RECORD IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMA TION OF ACCOUNT; COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF M/S. UDGAM COMME RCIAL (P) LTD. (LENDER); COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELL ANT COMPANY REFLECTING THE TRANSACTIONS; COPY OF INCOME TAX RET URN FILED BY THE LENDER FOR THE AY 2009-10; COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND A RTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF THE LENDER; AND COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIALS OF THE LENDER FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 ST MARCH 2009, THE LD. CIT (A) MADE HIMSELF SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY ESTABL ISHED THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS AND GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION. ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 12 17. MOREOVER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT ON RECO RD ALL THE DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINE SS OF THE CREDITORS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND TH E AO HAS NOT PREFERRED TO FILE ANY COMMENT, WE FIND NO SCOPE TO INTERFERE INTO THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY LD. CIT (A). MOREOVER, PE RUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALSO GOES TO PROVE THAT THE AO HAS NOT EVEN PREFERRED TO SUMMON THE PARTIES TO MAKE COMPLETE EN QUIRY SO AS TO ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, JUDGMENT S CITED AS CIT- II VS. M/S. JANSAMPARK ADVERTISING AND MARKETING (P ) LTD. ITO 525/2014 DATED 11.03.2015 AND CIT(CENTRAL)-I VS. MA NISH BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. ITA 928/2011 DATED 15.11.2011 RELIED UPON BY LD. DR ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE. 18. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, APPEA L BEING ITA NO.2222/DEL/2014 FILED BY THE REVENUE IS HEREBY DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 3 RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (N.K. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 3 RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 TS ITA NOS.2054 & 2222/DEL./2014 13 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT (A)-3, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.