DCIT CC-2 (1), New Delhi V. Bharti Teletech LTd, New Delhi

ITA 2174/DEL/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1228 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANURADHA MISRA
• Keywords: Depreciation; Retrospective amendment; Scheme of amalgamation
• Section: 43B; 32; 28

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH A AA A : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G. BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SHRI SHRI SHRI A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008 2174/DEL/2008 2174/DEL/2008 2174/DEL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSMENT YEAR : : : : 2005 2005 2005 2005- -- -06 0606 06 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -2(1), 2(1), 2(1), 2(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. VS VSVS VS. .. . M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED, Q QQ Q- -- -195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE PHASE PHASE PHASE- -- -I, I,I, I, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CROSS OBJECTION NO CROSS OBJECTION NO CROSS OBJECTION NO CROSS OBJECTION NO. .. .107/DEL/2009 107/DEL/2009 107/DEL/2009 107/DEL/2009 (IN ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008) (IN ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008) (IN ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008) (IN ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008) ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 2005 2005 2005- -- -06 0606 06 M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITE M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITE M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITE M/S BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED, D,D, D, Q QQ Q- -- -195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 195, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE PHASE PHASE PHASE- -- -I, I,I, I, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. VS. VS. VS. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -2(1), 2(1), 2(1), 2(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO. ITA NO.1033/DEL/2011 1033/DEL/2011 1033/DEL/2011 1033/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 2005 2005 2005- -- -06 0606 06 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INC INCINC INCOME TAX, OME TAX, OME TAX, OME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -2(1), 2(1), 2(1), 2(1), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. VS. VS. VS. VS. M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED), LIMITED), LIMITED), LIMITED), C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., B BB B- -- -17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 065. 110 065. 110 065. 110 065. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. PAN : AABCB3989M. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SMT.ANURADHA MISRA, CIT-DR. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL BHALLA, CA. ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 2 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH : : : : ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008 ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008 ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008 ITA NO.2174/DEL/2008 :- THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-V, NEW DELHI DATED 17 TH MARCH, 2008 FOR THE AY 2005-06. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELET ING THE ADDITION OF RS.21,59,892/- MADE U/S 43B OF THE IT ACT ON ACCOUNT OF LOCAL AREA DEVELOPMENT TAX (LADT) WHICH WAS RELATING TO A.Y. 1997-98, 2000-01, 2001-02 & 2002-0 3. THE AO HAD TREATED THE PAYMENT OF LADT AS PROVISIONAL PAYMENT FOR WHICH LIABILITY WAS NOT CRYSTALLIZED. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN DEL ETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF LOCAL SALES TAX AMOUNTING TO RS.1.2 6 CRORES PERTAINING TO JAN-1999 TO MAR-2002. ALTHOUGH THE DEMAND WAS PROVISIONAL AND LIABILITY WAS NOT CRYSTALLIZ ED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT IS STATED BY THE LEARNED CIT- DR THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT W AS FOUND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDE RATION, THE ASSESSEE MADE THE PAYMENT OF ` 21,59,892/- BEING LOCAL AREA DEVELOPMENT TAX UNDER PROTEST. SIMILARLY, THE ASSESSEE ALSO MADE THE PAYMENT OF ` 1,26,00,000/- TO THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT WHICH WAS A LSO RELATING TO EARLIER YEAR AND DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE A S PER THE DIRECTION OF THE HONBLE HARYANA TAX TRIBUNAL. IT IS STATED BY THE LEARNED CIT-DR THAT SINCE THE PAYMENT WAS NEITHER PER TAINING TO THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL NOR ANY LIABILITY HAS ACCRUED DURI NG THE YEAR AND MOREOVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO DISPUTED ITS LIABILITY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER RIGHTLY DISALLOWED THE SAME. SHE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 3 ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD BE REVERSED AND TH AT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE RESTORED. 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HA ND, STATED THAT AS PER PROVISION OF SECTION 43B OF INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961, ANY PAYMENT RELATING TO TAX, DUTY, CESS OR FEE IS ALLOWABL E IN THE YEAR OF PAYMENT IRRESPECTIVE OF THE YEAR TO WHICH SUCH LIABIL ITY PERTAINS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE NEVER CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION IN THE EARLIER YEAR WHEN THE LIABILITY HAS ARISEN BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY SUCH DEDUCTION DUE TO PROHIBITION OF SECTION 43B . THE DEDUCTION IS CLAIMED ON PAYMENT BASIS IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATI ON. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A ) SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. SECTION 4 3B OF THE ACT READS AS UNDER:- 43B. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHE R PROVISION OF THIS ACT, A DEDUCTION OTHERWISE ALLOWABLE UNDER THIS ACT IN RESPECT OF [(A) ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF TAX, DUTY, CESS OR FEE, BY WHATEVER NAME CALLED, UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE, OR] (B) ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AS AN EMPLOYER BY WAY OF CONTRIBUTION TO ANY PROVIDENT FUND OR SUPERANNUATION FUND OR GRATUITY FUND OR ANY OTHER FU ND FOR THE WELFARE OF EMPLOYEES, [OR] [(C) ANY SUM REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 36,] [OR] [(D) ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AS INTEREST ON ANY LOAN OR BORROWING FROM ANY PUBLIC FINANCIAL INSTITUT ION [OR A STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION OR A STATE INDUSTRIAL I NVESTMENT ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 4 CORPORATION], IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDI TIONS OF THE AGREEMENT GOVERNING SUCH LOAN OR BORROWING[,O R] [(E) ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AS INTEREST ON ANY [LOAN OR ADVANCES] FROM A SCHEDULED BANK IN ACCORDANC E WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT GOVE RNING SUCH LOAN [OR ADVANCES],] [OR] [(F) ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AS AN EMPLOYER IN LIEU OF ANY LEAVE AT THE CREDIT OF HIS EMPLOYEE,] SHALL BE ALLOWED (IRRESPECTIVE OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR I N WHICH THE LIABILITY TO PAY SUCH SUM WAS INCURRED BY THE ASSESSE E ACCORDING TO THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING REGULARLY EMP LOYED BY HIM) ONLY IN COMPUTING THE INCOME REFERRED TO IN SECTION 28 OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH SUM IS ACTUALLY PAID BY HIM: 6. FROM A PERUSAL OF ABOVE SECTION, IT IS EVIDENT TH AT IT HAS AN OVERRIDING EFFECT ABOVE THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE I NCOME-TAX ACT AND IT PROVIDES THAT ANY SUM PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY O F TAX, DUTY, CESS OR FEE SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY IN COMPUTING THE INC OME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH SUM IS ACTUALLY PAID BY H IM. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE PAYMENT OF LOCAL AREA DEVELOPMENT T AX OF ` 21,59,892/- AND PAYMENT OF SALES TAX OF ` 1,26,00,000/- WAS MADE DURING THE ACCOUNTING YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ON THESE FACTS, IN OUR OPINION, PROVISI ON OF SECTION 43B WOULD BE SQUARELY APPLICABLE AND THE DEDUCTION IS RIG HTLY DIRECTED TO BE ALLOWED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 43B, IT IS NOT RELEVANT WHE THER THE LIABILITY IS PERTAINING TO THE EARLIER YEAR OR OF THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. EVEN IN RESPECT OF LIABILITY IN RESPECT OF EARLIER YEAR, THE PAYMENT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE AMOUNT IS ACTUALLY PAID. IN OUR OPINION, MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISPUTED ITS LIABI LITY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT WOULD ALSO NOT BE RELEVAN T. THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN RAISED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE AUTHORITIES NOMIN ATED UNDER LOCAL AREA DEVELOPMENT TAX ACT AND ALSO SALES TAX ACT . THE ASSESSEE ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 5 HAS MADE THE PAYMENT OF SUCH LIABILITY DURING THE ACC OUNTING YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, TH OUGH UNDER PROTEST. THEREFORE, ON THESE FACTS, PROVISION OF SECTI ON 43B WOULD BE SQUARELY APPLICABLE AND LIABILITY WOULD BE ALLOWED O N THE BASIS OF ACTUAL PAYMENT IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE, THEREF ORE, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED B Y THE REVENUE. C.O. NO.107/DEL/2009 C.O. NO.107/DEL/2009 C.O. NO.107/DEL/2009 C.O. NO.107/DEL/2009 :- 7. IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOL LOWING GROUND:- THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE AC TION OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) IN DISALLOWING DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL AMOUNTING TO RS.71,19,141/- ALLEGEDLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME IS NOT ALLOWABL E U/S 32 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN THE CROSS- OBJECTION IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2008-09 AND 2009-10 VIDE ITA NOS.5321 & 5322/DEL/2012, WHEREIN THE ITAT, VIDE ORD ER DATED 19 TH DECEMBER, 2012, HELD AS UNDER:- 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE FIND TH AT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SMIFS SECURITIES LTD. REPORTED IN 348 ITR 302, WHEREIN THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT GOODWILL IS AN ASSE T WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 32 AND DEPRECIATION IS ADMISSIBLE. THE QUESTION CONSIDERED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AND ITS ANSWER READS AS UNDER: ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 6 QUESTION NO.[B]: WHETHER GOODWILL IS AN ASSET WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 32 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AND WHETHER DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL IS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE SA ID SECTION? ANSWER : IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION O F RS.54,85,430/- AS DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL. IN THE C OURSE OF HEARING, THE EXPLANATION REGARDING ORIGIN OF SUC H GOODWILL WAS GIVEN AS UNDER: IN ACCORDANCE WITH SCHEME OF AMALGAMATION OF YSN SHARES & SECURITIES (P) LTD WITH SMIFS SECURITIES LTD. (DULY SANCTIONED BY HONBLE HIGH COURTS OF BOMBAY AND CALCUTTA) WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1 ST APRIL, 1998, ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF YSN SHARES & SECURITIES (P) LTD . WERE TRANSFERRED TO AND VEST IN THE COMPANY. IN THE PROCESS GOODWILL HAS ARISEN IN THE BOOKS OF THE COMPANY. 7. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT EXCESS CONSIDERATION PAID BY THE ASSESSEE OVER THE VALUE OF NET ASSETS ACQUIRED OF YSN SHARES AND SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED [AMALGAMATING COMPANY] SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS GOODWILL ARISING ON AMALGAMATION. IT WAS CLAIMED THA T THE EXTRA CONSIDERATION WAS PAID TOWARDS THE REPUTATION WH ICH THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY WAS ENJOYING IN ORDER TO RETAIN ITS EXISTING CLIENTELE. 8. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT GOODWILL WAS NTO AN ASSET FALLING UNDER EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 32(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ACT, FOR SHORT]. 9. WE QUOTE HEREINBELOW EXPLANATION 3 TO SECTION 32 (1) OF THE ACT: EXPLANATION 3. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUB-SECTION, THE EXPRESSIONS ASSETS AND BLOCK OF ASSETS SHALL MEAN [A] TANGIBLE ASSETS, BEING BUILDINGS, MACHINERY, PLANT OR FURNITURE; [B] INTANGIBLE ASSETS, BEING KNOW-HOW, PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, LICENCES, FRANCHISES OR ANY OTHE R BUSINESS OR COMMERCIAL RIGHTS OF SIMILAR NATURE. ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 7 EXPLANATION 3 STATES THAT THE EXPRESSION ASSET SHALL MEAN AN INTANGIBLE ASSET, BEING KNOW-HOW, PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, LICENSES, FRANCHISES OR ANY OTHER BUSINESS OR COMMERCIAL RIGHTS OF SIMILAR NATURE. A REA DING THE WORDS ANY OTHER BUSINESS OR COMMERCIAL RIGHTS OF SIMILAR NATURE IN CLAUSE (B) OF EXPLANATION 3 INDICA TES THAT GOODWILL WOULD FALL UNDER THE EXPRESSION ANY OTHER BUSINESS OR COMMERCIAL RIGHT OF A SIMILAR NATURE. TH E PRINCIPLE OF EJUSDEM GENERIS WOULD STRICTLY APPLY WHIL E INTERPRETING THE SAID EXPRESSION WHICH FINDS PLACE IN EXPLANATION 3(B). IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT GOODWI LL IS AN ASSET UNDER EXPLANATION 3(B) TO SECTION 32(1) OF T HE ACT. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THESE APP EALS. THESE ARE DISMISSED. 9. SINCE THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2008-09 A ND 2009- 10 WHILE AGREEING WITH THE CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE ALLOW THE ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TO ALLOW THE DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL. ITA NO.1033/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1033/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1033/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1033/DEL/2011 :- 10. IN THIS APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE, THE ONLY GR OUND RAISED IS AGAINST CANCELLATION OF PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTIO N 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AMOUNTING TO ` 26,05,072/-. THE PENALTY WAS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWA NCE OF DEPRECIATION ON GOODWILL. 11. WHILE DECIDING THE ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION ABOVE, W E HAVE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEPRECIATION ON G OODWILL. SINCE THE DISALLOWANCE ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE PENALTY WAS LEVIED HAS BEEN ITA-2174/D/2008 & 2 OTHERS 8 DELETED AND A DIRECTION HAS BEEN ISSUED TO ALLOW THE D EPRECIATION ON GOODWILL, THE BASIS FOR LEVY OF PENALTY DOES NOT SURVIV E. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) WHEREIN HE HAS CA NCELLED THE PENALTY. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISM ISSED WHEREAS THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH FEBRUARY, 2013. SD/- SD/- ( (( (A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN A.D.JAIN) )) ) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) (G.D.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 28.02.2013 VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. REVENUE : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE CIRCLE- -- -2(1), NEW DELHI. 2(1), NEW DELHI. 2(1), NEW DELHI. 2(1), NEW DELHI. 2. ASSESSEE : M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, M/S BEETEL TELETECH LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED), (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED), (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED), (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI TELETECH LIMITED), C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., B C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., B C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., B C/O J.C.BHALLA & CO., B- -- -17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, 17, MAHARANI BAGH, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 065. 110 065. 110 065. 110 065. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR