DCIT, New Delhi V. Global Healthline Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 255/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4050 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SH ARUN KUMAR YAD AV
• Keywords: Gift; Tax effect
• Section: 37(1)

Judgement Text

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 ITA NO. 255/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 DCIT, CIRCLE 10(1), VS. M/S GLOBAL HEALTHLINE PVT. LTD. NEW DELHI 4&5, COMMUNITY CENTRE, ZAMRUDUR, KAILASH COLONY, DELHI 110 041 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. SH. ARUN KUMAR YAD AV, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : NONE ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THIS APPEAL WHICH IS EMAN ATE FROM THE ORDER DATED 30.10.2014 OF LD. CIT(A)-XV, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL READS AS UND ER:- 1. WHETHER ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 7,31,483/- MADE ON A/ C OF MARKETING EXPENSES IGNORING THE FACT THAT ACCEPTING GIFTS, TRAVEL FACI LITIES, HOSPITALITY, CASH OF MONETARY GRANTS FROM PHARMACEUTICAL AND ALLIED HEAL TH CARE SECTOR INDUSTRY IS PROHIBITED BY MCI. 2.WHETHER ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR N O. OS/2012 HAD HELD THAT SUCH FREEBIES BY PHARMACEUTICAL AND ALLIED HEALTHCA RE AND INADMISSIBLE U/ S 37(1) OF THE I. T. ACT. 3. WHETHER ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS2,93,181/-- MADE ON A CCOUNT OF PERSONAL USAGE OF CARS IGNORING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HIMSELF STUNT ED THAT DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY ARE NOT HAVING SEPARATE VEHICULAR FOR THEIR PERSONAL USE. 2 4. WHETHER ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AN D IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,69,141/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE, POSTAL & INTEREST EXPENSES IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY ARE NOT HAVING ANY SEPARATE TELEPHONE F OR THEIR PERSONAL USE. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE, TO ADD, ALTER OT;, A MEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING. 2. IN THIS CASE, NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS SENT BY THE REGISTERED AD POST AT THE ADDRESS MENTIONED IN COL. NO. 11 OF FORM NO. 36, WHICH WAS RETURNED BACK WITH THE REMARKS LEFT AND NO NEW ADDRESS HAS BEEN FURN ISHED IN THE REGISTRY RECORDS BY THE ASSESEE. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED TO ISSUE NOTICE AGAIN AND AGAIN TO THE ASSES SEE ON THE SAME ADDRESS, THEREFORE, WE ARE DECIDING THE PRESENT APPEAL EXPARTE QUA ASSESS EE, AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. 3. DURING THE HEARING, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. A FTER PERUSING THE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS BEL OW THE LIMIT OF RS. 10 LACS, AS FIXED BY THE CBDT AND, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/200 7- ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE , THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS CIRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HE REUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME -TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/ - 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/ - 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/ - IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCR IBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 3 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIB UNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 AB OVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERA TIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEAL WAS FILED. 5. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORITIES, T HEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE PRESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE A MOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 6. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HAVE WIT HDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALSO OF THE VIE W THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO B E FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/10/2017. SD/- SD/- (L.P. SAHU) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11/10/2017 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 4