JCIT (OSD), Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad V. Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 303/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9695 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.303/AHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE 1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD. VS. CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD., 8 TH FLOOR, ZYDUS TOWER, OPP ISCON TEMPLE, SATELLITE CROSS ROAD, AHMEDABAD - 380015 [PAN NO. AAACC 6253 G] ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI LALIT P. JAIN, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JIGAR PATEL, A.R. DATE OF HEARING 06/09/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29/11/2018 O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE US BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, AHMEDABAD ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 28/12/2016 PASSED BY THE DEP UTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 WHEREBY A ND WHEREUNDER THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTU OUS. REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS: (1) THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FA CTS IN HOLDING THE ORDER U/S 143(3) R.W.S. AS INFRUCTUOUS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT SAID DEC ISION HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND FURTHER APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRE D. (2) THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.48,00,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF REMUNERATION RECEIVED FROM PARTNERSHIP FIRM. (3) THE APPELLANT CRAVES, TO LEAVE, TO AMEND AND/O R TO ALTER ANY GROUND OR ADD A NEW GROUND WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. - 2 - ITA NO.303/AHD/2018 JCIT(OSD) VS. CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD ASST.YEAR 2009-10 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IS THIS THAT THE REGULAR A SSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144(C)(5) OF THE ACT WAS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER ON 23.01.2014 ACCEPTING ITS MAT COMPUTATION DETERMINING BOOK PROFIT OF RS.1,77, 27,48,435/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, WHILE EXERCISING THE POWER U/S 263 OF THE ACT ASSESSEE FO UND THE SAID ORDER OF ASSESSMENT ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE RE VENUE AND ISSUED A SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE ON 22.07.2015. THE LEARNED PCIT ULTIMA TELY DIRECTED THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER GIVING FRESH OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE UPON WHICH REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING WAS INITIATED CU LMINATING INTO THE ORDER OF ADDITION DATED 28.12.2016 TO THE TUNE OF RS.48,00,00,000/- H OLDING THE PAYMENT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S. ZYDUS HEALTHCARE SIKKIM; IS NOT A BUSINESS INCOME EXEMPTED AS A SHARE OF BUSINESS PROFIT RATHER REMUNERATION RECEIV ED FOR ACTIVELY PERFORMING ACTIVITIES AGREED UPON WITH THE SAID FIRM OF SIKKIM. BEING AGGRIEVED BY AND/OR DISSATISFIED WITH THE SAI D ORDER DATED 28.12.2016 AN APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE TH E FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. BEFORE THE SAID APPEAL TAKEN UP BY THE LD CIT(A) ORDER U/S 263 PASSED BY THE LD PCIT WAS QUASHED BY THE HONBLE ITAT IN ASSESSEES APPEAL. THE SAID FACT WAS MADE KNOWN TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN THE SAID APPEAL. SINCE THE V ERY BASIS OF THE SAID ORDER OF REASSESSMENT BEING THE ORDER U/S 263 EXERCISING REV ISIONAL JURISDICTION FOR FRAMING REASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE LEARNED PCIT-I HAS BEEN QUASHED BY AND UNDER THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2017 PASSED IN ITA NO.2713/AHD/2015 FOR ASST. YEAR 2009-10, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DISMISSED THE SAID APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE A SSESSEE TREATING IT AS INFRUCTUOUS. HENCE, THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE US BY THE REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WHO HAS NARRATED THE ABOVE FACTS BEFORE US AND A COPY OF THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL HAS ALSO BEEN HANDED OVER TO US. HOWEVER, THE LD DR COULD NO T REBUT THE SAME. SINCE THE VERY - 3 - ITA NO.303/AHD/2018 JCIT(OSD) VS. CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD ASST.YEAR 2009-10 BASIS OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED BEFORE US BEING THE ORD ER FOR FRAMING ASSESSMENT BY THE AO PASSED BY THE LEARNED PCIT-1 HAS BEEN QUASHED BY TH E CO-ORDINATE BENCH THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) BECA ME INFRUCTUOUS AS RIGHTLY HELD BY THE LD CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, FIND NO MERIT IN THE INST ANT APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE. THUS, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29/11/2018 SD/- SD/- ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 29/11/2018 PRITI YADAV, SR.PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. () / THE CIT(A)-1, AHMEDABAD. 5. , ! ' , #$%% / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &' () / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !, #$ / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 15/11/2018 (DICTATION PAGES 4) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 16/11/2018 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER