Cohesive Management Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, Ward- 6(2), New Delhi

ITA 3351/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9560 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA
• Keywords: Business income; Earning of tax free income; Rule 8D
• Section: 14A; 250; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 3351/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 M/S COHESIVE MANAGEMENT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., WARD-6(2), NEW DELHI 305, BAKSHI HOUSE, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI (PAN:AADCC6393E) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. SURENDER KUMAR, CA SH. RAHUL CHAURASIA, CA REVENUE BY : SH. MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR. DR. ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-33, NEW DELHI R ELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT THE ORDER DATED 27-02-2019 PASSED U/S 250 OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT ) BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) -33, NEW DELHI , IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO PASS THE ORDER EX-PARTE, ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILA BLE ON RECORD, WITHOUT GIVING THE APPELLANT COMPANY AN ADEQUATE OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN THE MATTER 2. THAT THE ORDER DATED 27-02-2019 PASSED U/S 250 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) -33 , NEW DELHI, IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,76,255/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSE S INCURRED FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME BY TAKING RECOURSE TO THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT READ TOGETHER WITH RULE 8D O F THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. 3. THAT THE ORDER DATED 27-02-2019 PASSED U/S 250 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) -33 , NEW DELHI, 2 IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 10,46,446/- IN RESPECT OF AMOUNT S RECEIVED FROM M/S BRIGHTSUN MERCHANT PVT. LTD TOWARDS REIMBURSEME NT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES PAID BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY ON ITS BEHAL F BY TREATING THE SAME AS ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS PER PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 4. THAT THE ORDER DATED 27-02-2019 PASSED U/S 250 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) -33 , NEW DELHI, IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER IN TREATING SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.7,19,238/- EARNED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES O F M/S RANDER CORPORATION LTD AS ITS BUSINESS INCOME. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS PASSED TH E IMPUGNED ORDER EX PARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO T HE ASSESSEE. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASI DE TO THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, AS P ER LAW, AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. HE UNDERTAKES THAT ASS ESSEE WILL COOPERATE FOR DISPOSING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST A PPELLATE AUTHORITY AS DIRECTED BY THIS BENCH. 3. LEARNED DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED OR DER PASSED BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DATED 27.2.2019, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS NOT PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDED THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE EX PARTE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE, I AM SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLAT E AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE 3 SAME AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER PROVIDING SUFFICIENT O PPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. KEEPING IN VIEW OF NON COOPERATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND CO OPERATE IN THE SPEEDY DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL, I AM DIRECTING THE ASSESSEE THROUGH HIS COUNSEL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON 23.03.2020. THERE IS NO NEED TO ISSUE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07/01/2020. SD/- [H.S. SI DHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 07/01/2020 SH COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES