DCIT Circle - 21(1), New Delhi V. Ratnagiri Gas and Power Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2952/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7331 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUSHMA SINGH
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3); 115JB; 37(1)

Judgement Text

1 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDIC IAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6548/DEL/2016 ( A.Y 2012-13) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFEREN CING) RATNAGIRI GAS AND POWER PVT. LTD. NTPC BHAWAN, CORE-7, SCOPE COMPLEX, 7, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI AADCR1375F (APPELLANT) VS DCIT CIRCLE-21(1) NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 2952/DEL/2019 ( A.Y 2013-14) DCIT CIRCLE-21(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS RATNAGIRI GAS AND POWER PVT. LTD. NTPC BHAWAN, CORE-7, SCOPE COMPLEX, 7, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI AADCR1375F (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. VED JAIN, CA & SH. AKSHIT GOEL, CA RESPONDENT BY SMT. SUSHMA SINGH, CIT, DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2016 & 31/01/2019 PASSED BY CIT (A)-7, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY. DATE OF HEARING 14.01.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25.01.2021 2 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 6548/DEL/2016 (A.Y. 2012-13 ASSESSEES APPE AL) 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [CIT(A )] IS BAD BOTH IN THE EYE OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 2(I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOW ANCE OF RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS PAYABLE TO GE INTERNATIONAL LTD . (II) THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACT S AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE REJECTING THE CONTENTION OF THE AS SESSEE THAT THE BONUS PAYABLE BEING AN ASCERTAINED LIABILITY, THE SAME IS ALLOWABLE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. (III) THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE DIS ALLOWANCE MISINTERPRETING THE TERMS OF COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TH E GE INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND THE ASSESSEE. 3(I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS PAYABLE TO GE INTERNATIONAL LTD., WHILE COMPUTING MINIMUM ALTERNATE TAX (MAT) UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT. (II) THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACT S AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THE BONUS PAYABLE TO BE A PROVISION FOR UNASCERTAINED L IABILITY DESPITE THE SAME BEING AN ASCERTAINED LIABILITY AND A REVENUE EXPEND ITURE INCURRED DURING THE YEAR. 3 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 ITA NO. 2952/DEL/2019 (A.Y. 2013-14 REVENUES APPEA L) 1. ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN GIVING RELIEF TO THE ASSE SSEE OF RS. 2,15,05,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ATTRIBUTED TO WORK IN PROGRE SS ONLY RELYING UPON THE ORDER OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR A.Y. 2012-13 WITHOUT G OING INTO THE MERITS OF ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN THE MATER FOR THE IMPUGN ED ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN GIVING RELIEF TO THE ASSE SSEE OF RS. 65,25,165/- ON ACCOUNT OF HQ EXPENSES MERELY RELYING UPON THE ORDE R OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR A.Y. 2012-13 WHILE FAILING TO APPRECIATE THE MERIT OF THE ADDITION AND ESPECIALLY NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RE CORD VIDE THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AO DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING S. 3. FIRSTLY, WE ARE TAKING UP ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-1 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN FOR THE A. Y. 2012-13 ON 2 9.09.2012 DECLARING INCOME AT RS.10,20,84,87,730/- WHICH WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE COMP ANY DECLARED BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB AT RS.13,61,73,81,701/-. ORDER U/S 143(3) WAS PASSED ON 29.03.2015 ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS.12,15,07,27,2 40/- AFTER ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES OF RS.1,11,48,304/- U/S 41( 1) ON ACCOUNT OF CESSATION OF TRADING LIABILITY, RS.68,22,800/- ON ACCOUNT OF HQ EXPENSES, RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS PAID TO GE INTER NATIONAL LTD. AND RS. 1,79,43,00,000/- U/S 36(1) (III) ON ACCOUNT OF INTE REST ATTRIBUTED TO WORK IN PROGRESS. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE. 5. AS REGARDS TO ADDITION OF RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS 4 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 PAYABLE TO GENERAL ELECTRIC INTERNATIONAL LTD., THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING HAVING NTPC AND GAIL AS ITS MAJOR SHAREHOLDER AND IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GENER ATION OF POWER AND THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE, BEING A PUBLIC SECTOR UND ERTAKING, HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY CAG. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED A N EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS PAYABLE TO EMPLOYEES OF RS.12,99,68,406/-, PAYABLE TO GENERAL ELECTRIC INTERNATIONAL LTD UNDER THE HEAD REPAIR AN D MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO A LONG TERM AGREEMENT WITH GE INTE RNATIONAL LTD. ACCORDING TO WHICH THEY HAVE TO ENSURE 90% AVAILABILITY OF THE P OWER PLANT FOR OPERATION AND IF THEY ENSURE AVAILABILITY ABOVE 90%, THEN THEY AR E ELIGIBLE 'OR BONUS, ELSE THEY ARE LIABLE FOR PENALTY. THIS WILL ACCRUE ON YEAR TO YEAR BASIS AND WILL BE FINALLY SETTLED ON CLOSURE OF THE CONTRACT. HOWEVER, THE AS SESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE GE INTERNATIONAL LTD. TO PROVE THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE T HE BASIS OF CALCULATION OF BONUS PAYABLE AND ALSO THAT THE AMOUNT OF BONUS PER TAINS TO THE CURRENT YEAR. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), AND FILED THE COPY OF LONG TERM COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT ( CSA) WITH GE INTERNATIONAL DATED 20.06.2009 VIDE AN APPLICATION U/R 46A. THE LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT IN THE REMAND REPORT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REITERATED THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND OBSERVED THAT THE LIABILITY IS AN UNASCERTAINED LIABILITY. ON THE PERUSAL OF THE WRIT TEN SUBMISSIONS AND THE REJOINDER TO THE REMAND REPORT, THE CIT(A) HELD THA T THE BONUS PAYMENT TO GE INTERNATIONAL IS SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDI TIONS IN THE CONTRACT AND THEREFORE, THE LIABILITY CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE AN ASCERTAINED LIABILITY. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO A LONG TERM COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT (CSA) WITH GE INTER NATIONAL, A RENOWNED INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, ON 20.06.2009 FOR THE P OWER PLANT AND THE SAID AGREEMENT IS VALID MARCH 31. 2025. AS PER THE AGRE EMENT, (GE) HAVE TO ENSURE 5 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 90% AVAILABILITY OF THE POWER PLANT FOR OPERATION A ND IF THEY ENSURE AVAILABILITY ABOVE 90% THEN THEY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR BONUS OTHERWIS E THEY ARE LIABLE FOR PENALTY. THIS WILL ACCRUE ON YEAR TO YEAR BASIS AND WILL BE FINALLY SETTLED ON CLOSURE OF THE CONTRACT. THE LD. AR POINTED OUT TH AT AS PER THE CSA WITH GE INTERNATIONAL UNDER WHICH THEY HAVE TO ENSURE 90% E QUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR (EAF) OF THE POWER PLANT FOR OPERATION THROU GHOUT ALL HOURS IN OPERATING YEAR, WHICH ARE 8,760 HOURS IN A REGULAR YEAR AND 8 ,748 HOURS IN A CALENDAR LEAP YEAR. THE METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATION OF AVAIL ABILITY OF PLANT UNDER DIFFERENT SCENARIO IS EXPLAINED IN CSA-EXHIBIT A & B. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE CONTR ACTOR HAS ENSURED THE 90% AVAILABILITY OF THE POWER PLANT TO THE ASSESSEE. AC CORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE BOOKED AN EXPENDITURE OF RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCO UNT OF BONUS PAYABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT AS REGAR DS, THE PAYMENT OF THE BONUS, THERE IS AN OPTION GIVEN TO THE CONTRACTING PARTIES IN THE CSA. THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT IN THIS REGARD ARE AS FO LLOWS: IN CASE OWNER IS NOT ENTITLED TO AN AVAILABILITY B ONUS FOR THE TERM OF AN AGP FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE FACILITYS POWER, THE CON TRACTOR AGREES THAT THE OWNER MAY CHOOSE TO EITHER PAY IN CASH TO THE CONTR ACTOR THE BONUS AMOUNT DUE OR CREDIT THE BONUS AMOUNT AS AN OFFSET AGAINST ANY FUTURE AMOUNT DUE FROM THE CONTRACTOR TO THE OWNER UNDER THIS AGREEME NT.' IN CASE OWNER IS ENTITLED TO AN AVAILABILITY BONUS FOR THE TERM OF AN AGP FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE FACILITY'S POWER, THE OWNER SH ALL BE, THROUGH LETTER OF CREDIT OR PRIOR TO THE EXPIRY OF 30 DAYS FROM THE S AME AGP, TO THE CONTRACTOR THE BONUS AMOUNT DUE TO THE OWNER UNDER THIS AGREEM ENT IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT, THE AS SESSEE IS LIABLE TO PAY BONUS TO THE CONTRACTOR WHERE THE AVAILABILITY EXCEEDS 90 % OF THE AVERAGE EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY FACTOR (EAF). AS REGARDS, THE PAYMENT OF THE BONUS , TWO CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN PRESCRIBED IN THE AGREEMENT: (I) WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO AVAILAB ILITY BONUS FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE POWER. 6 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 (II) WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO AVAILABILITY BONUS FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE POWER. IN THE FIRST CONDITION, WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT E NTITLED TO AVAILABILITY BONUS FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE OWNER, THE ASSESSEE HAS B EEN GIVEN AN OPTION FOR THE PAYMENT OF BONUS. THE ASSESSEE MAY CHOOSE EITHER TO PAY IN CASH TO THE CONTRACTOR OR IT MAY KEEP THE BONUS AMOUNT AS PAYABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR WHICH MAY BE ADJUSTED OF AGAINST ANY AMOUNT DUE FRO M THE CONTRACTOR I.E. GE INTERNATIONAL UNDER THE GIVEN AGREEMENT. THE SECOND CONDITION IS WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO AVAILABILITY BONUS FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE POWER, IN THIS CONDITION THE ASSESSEE SHALL PAY OFF AMOUNT OF BONUS THROUGH LETTER OF CREDIT WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME OF 30 DAYS. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LIABILITY OF BONUS HAS TO BE DISCHARGED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN BOTH CONDITIONS STATED ABOVE. THE ONLY OPTION GIVEN TO THE ASSESSE E IS WITH RESPECT TO THE PAYMENT / SETTLEMENT OF BONUS IN THE CONDITION WHERE ASSESSE E IS NOT ENTITLED TO RECOVER ANY BONUS FROM THE PURCHASER OF THE POWER. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE INCURRENCE O F THE EXPENDITURE THE ASSESSEE BECOMES LIABLE TO PAY THE BONUS TO THE CON TRACTOR AS SOON AS THE CONTRACTOR FULFILL THE CONDITIONS OF ANNUAL AVAILAB ILITY OF POWER PLANT IN TERMS OF THE FACTORS GIVEN UNDER THE SAID CONTRACT. THE LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT IF A BUSINESS LIABILITY HAS DEFINITELY ARISEN IN THE ACC OUNTING YEAR, THE DEDUCTION SHOULD BE ALLOWED ALTHOUGH THE LIABILITY MAY HAVE T O BE QUANTIFIED AND DISCHARGED AT A FUTURE DATE. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IT IS CERTAIN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSUMED THE LIABILITY AND IT IS CAPABL E OF BEING ESTIMATED WITH REASONABLE CERTAINTY. THUS, IF THESE REQUIREMENTS A RE SATISFIED THE LIABILITY CANNOT BE A CONTINGENT ONE. THE LIABILITY IS IN PRE SENT THOUGH IT WILL BE DISCHARGED AT A FUTURE DATE. IN THIS REGARD RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF BHARAT EARTH MOVERS VS. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC). THE LD. AR ALSO RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- (A) CIT VS. OBERON EDIFICES & ESTATES (P) LTD. (ITA NO . 163/2016 DATED 05.09.2019) (KER. HC). 7 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 (B) HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD VS. ADDL. CIT (ITA 541/2019 DATED 06.02.2020) (DEL HC) (C) PR.CIT VS. NHPC LIMITED (ITA NO. 256 OF 2015 DATED 21.03.2018) (P & H HC). THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE INCURRENCE OF THE EXPENDITURE THE ASSESSEE BECOMES LIABLE TO P AY THE BONUS TO THE CONTRACTOR AS SOON AS THE CONTRACTOR FULFILLS THE C ONDITIONS OF ANNUAL AVAILABILITY OF POWER PLANT IN TERMS OF THE FACTORS GIVEN UNDER THE SAID CONTRACT. FURTHER, THE MANNER OF COMPUTING AND PAYMENT IS ALSO MENTION ED IN THE SAME CONTRACT. THUS, IN THE CASE ON HAND THE LIABILITY IS AN ASCER TAINED LIABILITY AND THEREFORE THE EXPENDITURE IS ALLOWABLE U/S 37(1) AS INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. FURTHER, THE SAME CANNOT BE DISALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE BOOK PROFITS U/S 115J B OF THE ACT. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS AND JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRME D BY THE CIT(A) BE DELETED. 6. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO A LONG TERM COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT (CSA) WITH GE INTER NATIONAL, A RENOWNED INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, ON 20.06.2009 FOR THE P OWER PLANT AND THE SAID AGREEMENT IS VALID TILL MARCH 31, 2025. AS PER THE AGREEMENT WITH GE, THE PARTY HAS TO ENSURE 90% AVAILABILITY OF THE POWER P LANT FOR OPERATION AND IF THEY ENSURE AVAILABILITY ABOVE 90% THEN THEY ARE EL IGIBLE FOR BONUS OTHERWISE THEY ARE LIABLE FOR PENALTY. THIS WILL ACCRUE ON YE AR TO YEAR BASIS AND WILL BE FINALLY SETTLED ON CLOSURE OF THE CONTRACT. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE CONTRACTOR HAS ENSURED THE 90% AVAILABILITY OF THE POWER PLANT TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE BOOKED AN EXPEN DITURE OF RS. 12,99,68,406/- ON ACCOUNT OF BONUS PAYABLE TO THE C ONTRACTOR. THESE FACTS 8 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 WERE NOT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE AT ANY POINT OF TI ME. THERE WAS NO UNCERTAINTY REGARDING THE INCURRENCE OF THE EXPENDI TURE AND ASSESSEE BECOMES LIABLE TO PAY THE BONUS TO THE CONTRACTOR AS SOON A S THE CONTRACTOR FULFILLS THE CONDITIONS OF ANNUAL AVAILABILITY OF POWER PLANT IN TERMS OF THE FACTORS GIVEN UNDER THE SAID CONTRACT. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS EST ABLISHED THAT A BUSINESS LIABILITY HAS DEFINITELY ARISEN IN THE ACCOUNTING Y EAR WHICH IS YEAR TO YEAR BASIS. THE ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING THE MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING WHICH IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE. THEREFORE, THE LIABILITY I S ASCERTAINED LIABILITY AND IS ALLOWABLE U/S 37(1) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS NOT TAKEN COGNIZANCE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(A). THUS, APPE AL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2012-13 BEING ITA NO. 6548/DEL/2016 IS ALLOWED. 8. AS REGARDS TO A.Y. 2013-14 RELATING TO REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 2952/DEL/2019, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT GROUND NO. 1 IS RELATING TO THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 2,15,05,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ATTRIBUTED TO WORK IN PROGRESS ONLY REL YING UPON THE ORDER OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR A.Y. 2012-13 WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN THE MATER FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEA R. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. AS REGARDS TO GROUND NO. 2, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN GIVING R ELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 65,25,165/- ON ACCOUNT OF HQ EXPENSES MERELY RELYIN G UPON THE ORDER OF HIS PREDECESSOR FOR A.Y. 2012-13 WHILE FAILING TO APPRE CIATE THE MERIT OF THE ADDITION AND ESPECIALLY NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD VIDE THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DU RING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 9. THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 10. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED ALL THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE PERUSAL OF RECORDS, W E FIND THAT THE FACTS AS 9 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019 EMERGE FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y 2013-14 AR E IDENTICAL TO THAT OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR THAT IS OF A.Y. 2012-13 AND NO NEW FINDING OR FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN A. Y 2012-13, THE THEN CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED BOTH THESE ISSUES IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR THAT THE REVENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE REVENUE DID NOT PREFER ANY APPEAL WAS NOT CONTROVER TED BY THE LD. DR. SINCE, THE CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THE PRECEDING YEAR AND THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT(A) ON BOTH T HE ISSUES HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AS NO APPEAL FILED, FOLLOWING THE RU LE OF CONSISTENCY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THUS, REVENUES APPEAL BEI NG ITA NO. 2952/DEL/2019 FOR A.Y. 2013-14 IS DISMISSED. 11. IN RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BEING ITA NO . 6548/DEL/2016 FOR A.Y. 2012-13 IS ALLOWED AND APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BEING 2952/DEL/2019 FOR A.Y. 2013-14 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 25 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (R. K. PANDA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER DATED: 25/01/2021 R. NAHEED COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 10 ITA NOS. 6548/DEL/2016 & 2952/DEL/2019