DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Religare Technova Ltd., Noida

ITA 3113/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3485 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 13-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 3113/DEL/2014 A.Y. : 2008-09 DCIT, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI VS. M/S RELIGARE TECHNOVA LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS DION GLOBAL SOLUTION LTD.) 5 TH FLOOR, TOWER-A, LOGIX CYBER PARK, C-28/29, SECTOR-62, NOIDA- 201309 (PAN: AAACF1917E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. F.R. MEENA, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. RAVI SHARMA, A.R. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMP UGNED ORDER DATED 07.2.2014 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-XVIII, NEW DELHI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE REVENUES APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REMITTING THE MATTER REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF 14A OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME T AX RULES, 1962 TO THE FILE OF AO FOR VERIFICATION AND AT THE SAME TIME ALSO 2 EXPRESSING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE RESTRICT ED TO RS. 3,49,56,059/- AS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE, TO ADD, ALTER OR AME ND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING. 3 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE RETURN O F INCOME WAS FILED ON 30.9.2008 DECLARING TOTAL LOSS OF RS. 1,02,59,8 53/-. THE RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ACCORDING LY, STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND DULY COMPLIED WITH. IN R ESPONSE TO THE NOTICE, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ATTENDED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND FURNISHED THE DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS IN RESPONSE TO QUERIES RAISED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN IT PRODUCTS & IT SERVICES WHICH WERE EXAMINED BY THE AO AND AO OBSER VED THAT ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD INVESTMENTS, INCOME FROM WHICH DOES NOT OR SHALL NOT FORM PART OF TOTAL INCOME AND MADE THE AD DITION OF RS. 3,29,57,253/- U/S. 14A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 READ W ITH RULE 8D OF INCOME TAX RULES AND ADDED BACK THE SAME TO THE TOT AL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 1 43(3) OF THE I.T. ACT,1961 AND ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS. 2,84,06,58 9/-. 4. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF THE AO, ASSESSEE APP EALED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.2. 2014 HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. AGGRIEVED WITH THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A), REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 6. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND REITE RATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND STA TED THAT THE 3 LD.CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY REMITTED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 7. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE REL IED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS OF THE REV ENUE AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ELABORATELY DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IN VIDE PARA NO. 9.1 TO 9.2 AT PAGE NO. 32-33 IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.2.2014 WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 9.1 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FINDING OF THE AO AND SUBMISSIONS FILED BY LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT AND I FOUND THAT TH ERE IS SUBSTANCE IN ARGUMENT OF THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT THAT DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO RS. 3,49,56,059/- UNDER SEC TION 14A R.W.R. 8D. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED T O VERIFY THE CLAIM AND ALLOW IT AFTER PROPER VERIFIC ATION. IN THIS REGARD, RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI, IN TH E CASE OF TSL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. IN ITA N O. 2056/DEL/2011, WHEREIN VIDE PARA 12 OF THE ORDER, HONBLE ITAT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE IS SUE AFRESH BY REFERRING TO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT TO BE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION , THE REVENUES INTEREST IS FULLY PROTECTED IN THIS R EGARD 4 AS THE AO HAS BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO EXAMINE TH E BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FI ND ANY INFIRMITY OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 9.2 IN VIEW OF THE RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED JUDGMENT, ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY T HE CLAIM AND ALLOW. FOR THIS LIMITED PURPOSE, MATTER I S REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. GRO UNDS OF APPEAL NOS. 5 TO 7 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 8.1 ON PERUSING THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) , WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT THERE IS SUBSTANCE IN ARG UMENT OF THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE T HAT DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO RS. 3,49,56,059/- UNDER SEC TION 14A R.W.R. 8D. HENCE, LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM AND ALLOW IT AFTER PROPER VERIFICATION B Y PLACING THE RELIANCE OF THE DECISION OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI, IN THE CASE OF TSL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. IN ITA NO. 2056/ DEL/2011, WHEREIN VIDE PARA 12 OF THE ORDER, ITAT HAS HELD A S UNDER:- UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE IS SUE AFRESH BY REFERRING TO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT TO BE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION , THE REVENUES INTEREST IS FULLY PROTECTED IN THIS R EGARD AS THE AO HAS BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO EXAMINE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NO T FIND ANY INFIRMITY OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER OF TH E LD. 5 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 8.2 IN VIEW OF THE RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE MENTIONED DECISION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT (A) IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM AND ALLOW AND FOR THIS LIMITED PURPOSE, MATTER WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF AS SESSING OFFICER, WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART, H ENCE, WE UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE IN DISPUT E AND ACCORDINGLY, DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS AP PEAL. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/04/2017. SD/- SD/- [PRASHANT MAHARISHI] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICI AL MEMBER DATE 17/04/2017 SRBHATNAGAR + COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES