DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi V. Genpact India, Delhi

ITA 379/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7183 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Wholly owned subsidiary; Scheme of amalgamation; Rule 8D; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 10AA; 14A; 195; 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI C BEN CH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEM BER ITA NO. 379/DEL/2018 [A.Y 2014-15] THE DY. C.I.T VS. GENPACT INDIA, DELHI INFORM ATION CIRCLE 10(1) TECHNOLOGIES PARK, SHASTRI PA RK NEW DELHI NEW DELHI PAN : AAACG 9163 H ITA NO. 472/DEL/2018 [A.Y 2014-15] GENPACT INDIA, DELHI INFORMATION VS. THE DY. C.I .T TECHNOLOGIES PARK, SHASTRI PARK CIRCLE 10(1) NEW DELHI NEW DELHI PAN : AAACG 9163 H [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 01.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.09.2021 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SACHIT JOLLY, A DV REVENUE BY : MS SUNITA SINGH, CIT- DR 2 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, THE ABOVE CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE ARE PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS] - 35, NEW DELHI DATED 25.10.2017 PERTAINI NG TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. SINCE BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVITY. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LET US UNDERSTAND THE CLEAR FACTS OF THE CASE WHICH WOULD BE CLEAR FROM THE FOLLOWING ORDER OF TH E HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN WPC 686/2017 AND CM NO 29390/2019 . THE MOST RELEVANT PART OF THE SAID JUDGMENT READS AS UNDER: 1. AGGRIEVED BY ONE PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R CONCERNING THE ALLEGED LIABILITY OF THE PETITIONER (HEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE ) UNDER SECTIONS 115-QA AND 115-QB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT ) IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31ST DECEM BER, 2016 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO ) (RESPONDENT NO. 1), THE ASSESSEE HAS APPROACHED THIS COURT WITH THE PRE SENT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ALO NG WITH THE PETITION, AN APPLICATION BEING CM NO.3141/2017 WAS FILED SEEKING 3 INTERIM DIRECTIONS TO RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE DEMAND IN TERMS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 2. BY THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER, INTER ALIA , A DEMAND WAS SOUGHT TO BE CREATED UNDER SECTION 115-QA OF THE AC T IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSEE BUYING BACK 10 LAKHS EQUITY SHARES OUT OF OPENING SHARE CAPITAL OF 25,68,700 SHARES FROM M/S. GENPACT INDIA INVESTMENT, MAURITIUS (GII ) IN TWO PHASES IN MAY AND OCTOBER, 2013. THE CASE OF THE REVENUE WAS THAT THE SCHEME A DOPTED TO BUYBACK SUCH SHARES WAS A COLOURABLE DEVICE TO EVAD E BUYBACK DISTRIBUTION TAX LIABILITY UNDER THE ACT. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND WAS THAT THE BUYBACK OF SHARES WA S PURSUANT TO A SCHEME OF ARRANGEMENT UNDER SECTION 391 OF THE CO MPANIES ACT, 1956 (CA ) APPROVED BY THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI. THIS WOULD, THEREFORE, NOT BE A BUYBACK UNDER SECTION 77-A CA FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 115QA OF THE ACT, AS IT STOOD A T THE RELEVANT TIME. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT REQUIRES TO BE NOTICED THAT TH E IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT WAS PASSED UNDER SECTION 143 (3) OF T HE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY ) 2014-15. THE SAID IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DEALS WITH CERTAIN OTHER ISSUES, APART FROM T HE ISSUE CONCERNING THE DEMAND UNDER SECTION 115 QA OF THE A CT. AS REGARDS THE OTHER ISSUES, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED A STATUTORY APPEAL UNDER SECTION 246-A OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [CIT (A) ]. THE COURT IS INFORMED THAT THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDED IN THE SAID APPEAL AND AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE 4 CIT (A), THE REVENUE HAS FILED AN APPEAL, WHICH IS STATED TO BE PENDING BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ( ITAT ). 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE IMPUGNED GRIEVANCE, THE HO N'BLE HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER: 27. ACCORDINGLY, THE WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF WITH THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS: (I) THE COURT DECLINES TO ENTERTAIN THIS WRIT PETIT ION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST THE IMPUGNE D DEMAND RAISED BY THE REVENUE BY WAY OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESS MENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 115-QA OF THE ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSE E. (II) THE ASSESSEE IS GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIL E AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 246-A OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT (A) TO CHAL LENGE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER ONLY INSOFAR AS IT CREATE S A DEMAND UNDER SECTION 115 QA OF THE ACT. (III) IF SUCH AN APPEAL IS FILED WITHIN TEN DAYS FR OM TODAY, IT WILL BE CONSIDERED ON ITS OWN MERITS AND A REASONED ORDER D ISPOSING OF THE APPEAL WILL BE PASSED BY THE CIT (A) ON ALL ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, NOT LIMITED TO THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE P RESENT PETITION AS WELL AS ON THE RESPONSE THERETO BY THE REVENUE IN A CCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5 (IV) THE REASONED ORDER SHALL BE PASSED BY THE CIT (A) NOT LATER THAN 31ST OCTOBER, 2019. IT WILL BE COMMUNICATED TO THE PETITIONER WITHIN TEN DAYS THEREAFTER. FOR A PERIOD OF TWO WEE KS AFTER THE DATE OF SUCH COMMUNICATION OF ORDER, THE DEMAND UND ER THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER, IF IT IS AFFIRMED BY THE CIT (A) IN APPEAL, WILL NOT BE ENFORCED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. (V) THE COURT PLACES ON RECORD THE STATEMENT OF THE REVENUE THAT IT WILL NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION BEFORE THE CIT (A) AS TO THE MAINTAINABILITY OF SUCH AN APPEAL AND AS TO THE APP EAL BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. THE COURT ALSO TAKES ON RECORD THE S TATEMENT OF THE REVENUE THAT IT WILL NOT ENFORCE THE DEMAND IN TERM S OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE APPEAL. ALL OF THE ABOVE IS SUBJECT TO THE ASSESSEE FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A) WITHIN TEN DAYS FROM TODAY. (VI) IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THIS COURT HAS NOT EXPRE SSED ANY VIEW WHATSOEVER ON THE CONTENTIONS OF EITHER PARTY ON TH E MERITS OF THE CASE. 28. THE WRIT PETITION AND PENDING APPLICATION ARE D ISPOSED OF WITH ABOVE DIRECTIONS. NO COSTS 5. WITH THE ABOVE FACTUAL BACKGROUND, THE REVENUE H AS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 6 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN TREATING INCOME OF RS. 19,21,88 ,611/- FROM INTEREST ON FIXED DEPOSITS AS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTI ON U/S 10A & 10AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. C1T(A) ERRED IN TREATING INCOME OF RS.6,97,54,4 70/- FROM INTEREST ON INTER CORPORATE DEPOSITS AS ELIGIBLE FO R DEDUCTION U/S 1OA & 1OA A OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN TREATING INCOME OF RS.23,04,032 /- FROM INTEREST ON EMPLOYEE LOANS AS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTIO N U/S 10A & 10AA OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 4. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN TREATING INCOME OF RS.34,54,55, 81 1/- FROM FOREIGN EXCHANGE GAIN & FORWARD CONTRACT GAIN AS EL IGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 10A & 10AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 IGNO RING THE FACT, THAT THE GAIN IS ARISES DUE TO HEDGING ACTIVITY AND IS NOT DERIVED BY THE SPECIFIED BUSINESS ACTIVITY. 5. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN REDUCING THE TELECOMMUNICATION CHARGES OF RS.8,53,88,879/- FROM TOTAL TURNOVER ALSO FOR THE P URPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 10A& 10AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 6. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. C1T(A) ERRED IN REDUCING THE EXPENSES IN RESPEC T OF MIGRATION / ON THE JOB TRAINING AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,95,93,29,278 /- FROM TOTAL 7 TURNOVER ALSO FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF DED UCTION U/S 10A & 10AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 7. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS .64,18,782/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS DEPRECIATION ON COMPUTER PERIPHERALS. 8. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. C1T(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS .30,11,346/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT, IGNORING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 1 4A READ WITH RULE 8D OF IT RULES, 1962. 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS AO} HAS ERRED IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT ON THE APPELLANT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 DISREGARDING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAS MERGED WITH GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND H ENCE, THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION, BA D IN LAW, VOID-AB- TIO AND IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 2. THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW THE COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) {HEREIN ABOVE REFERRED AS CIT(A)} ERRED IN UPHOLDING THAT WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 10AA OF THE ACT FOLLOWING :RECEIPTS ARE TO BE EXCLUDED WITHIN THE AMBIT OF E XPORT TURNOVER AS DEFINED IN EXPLANATION 1 (I) TO SEC 10AA OF THE ACT: 8 (A) TELECOMMUNICATION EXPENSES RS.8,53,8 8,879/- (B) RECOVERY OF EXPENSES IN RESPECT RS. 195,93,29,278/- OF MIGRATION ON-THE-JOB TRAINING EXPENSE S 3. THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APP RECIATING THAT RECOVERY OF EXPENSES IN RESPECT MIGRATION/ ON- THE-JOB TRAINING SERVICES AND TELECOMMUNICATION EXPENSES WE RE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FIGURE OF EXPORT TURNOVER CONSIDE RED BY THE APPELLANT WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 10AA OF THE :T. 4. THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW THE CIT(A) ERRED IN UPH OLDING THE ORDER OF AO PARTLY AND NOT OWING COMPLETE RELIEF AS CLAIMED. 5. THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IS VOID AB INITIO AND BAD IN LAW. THAT THE APPELLANT PRAYS FOR LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, A MEND AND/OR VARY THE GROUND(S) OF APPEAL AT OR FORE THE TIME OF HEARING 7. AS MENTIONED AT THE VERY BEGINNING, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DEALT WITH OTHER ISSUES [OTHER THAN THE DEMAN D U/S 115QA OF THE ACT]. THE MATTER TRAVELLED UPTO THE TRIBUNAL AND T HE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 583/DEL/2020 ORDER DATED 23.07.2020 HAS QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL READ AS UNDER: 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS AVAILABLE BEFORE US. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD S, IT CAN BE SEEN 9 THAT ERSTWHILE ENTITY GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED WAS AMALGAMATED WITH GENPACT INDIA W.E.F. 30.04.2016 AS A RESULT OF SCHEME OF AMALGAMATION DULY APPROVED BY THE ORDER D ATED 17.08.2015 BY HONBLE HIGH COURT AT TELANGANA AND A NDHRA PRADESH AS WELL AS VIDE ORDER DATED 18.03.2016 BY HONBLE D ELHI HIGH COURT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ORDER BY MENTI ONING IN TITLE OF THE ORDER THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AS GENPACT IN DIA (NOW MERGED WITH GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED PAN: AAB CE4461B). THUS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS VERY MUCH AWARE THA T THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY GENPACT INDIA IS NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE. THIS ALSO IS SUPPORTED BY THE LETTER DATED 18.04.2016 AD DRESSED TO MEMBER (IT), CBDT AND COPY TO ASSESSING OFFICER, DC IT, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI INTIMATING THEREIN BY THE ASSESSEE THA T GENPACT INDIA (A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF EMPOWER) HAS, IN THE 68TH MEETING OF BOARD OF APPROVAL (BOA) FOR SEZS HELD ON DECEMBER 3 0, 2015, OBTAINED THE APPROVAL OF THE BOA FOR CHANGE IN THE ENTREPRENEURSHIP OF ITS SEZ UNITS TO EMPOWER. THE S AID LETTER ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE AFOREMENTIONED SCHEME HAS BEEN A LLOWED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD F OR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (VIDE ORDER DATED 17.08.2015 IN CP NO. 174 OF 2015) AND THE HONBLE H IGH COURT OF 10 DELHI AT NEW DELHI (VIDE ORDER DATED MARCH 18, 2016 IN CP NO. 703 OF 2015). THE COPIES OF AMALGAMATION ORDER AS SANCT IONED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND HONBLE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH ALONG WITH COPIES OF PAN OF GENP ACT INDIA AND DETAIL OF THE JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICERS WAS PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THE RELIAN CE UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF MA RUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. (SUPRA) BY THE LD. AR IS APT IN THE PRES ENT CASE. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OBSERVED IN PARA 19 AS FOLLOW S: 19. (III) THIRDLY, THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE SCHEME OF AMA LGAMATION APPROVED UNDER SECTION 394 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 195 6 IS THAT THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY CEASED TO EXIST. IN SARASWATI INDUSTRIAL SYNDICATE LTD., THE PRINCIPLE HAS BEEN FORMULATED B Y THIS COURT IN THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 5. GENERALLY, WHERE ONLY ONE COMPANY IS INVOLVED I N CHANGE AND THE RIGHTS OF THE SHAREHOLDERS AND CREDITORS ARE VARIED , IT AMOUNTS TO RECONSTRUCTION OR REORGANISATION OF SCHEME OF ARRAN GEMENT. IN AMALGAMATION TWO OR MORE COMPANIES ARE FUSED INTO O NE BY MERGER 11 OR BY TAKING OVER BY ANOTHER. RECONSTRUCTION OR AM ALGAMATION HAS NO PRECISE LEGAL MEANING. THE AMALGAMATION IS A BLE NDING OF TWO OR MORE 30 [2019] 260 TAXMAN 412 (DEL.) 31 (2019) 261 TAXMAN 137 (GUJ) EXISTING UNDERTAKINGS INTO ONE UNDERTAKING, T HE SHAREHOLDERS OF EACH BLENDING COMPANY BECOME SUBSTANTIALLY THE S HAREHOLDERS IN THE COMPANY WHICH IS TO CARRY ON THE BLENDED UNDERT AKINGS. THERE MAY BE AMALGAMATION EITHER BY THE TRANSFER OF TWO O R MORE UNDERTAKINGS TO A NEW COMPANY, OR BY THE TRANSFER O F ONE OR MORE UNDERTAKINGS TO AN EXISTING COMPANY. STRICTLY AMAL GAMATION DOES NOT COVER THE MERE ACQUISITION BY A COMPANY OF THE SHARE CAPITAL OF OTHER COMPANY WHICH REMAINS IN EXISTENCE AND CONTIN UES ITS UNDERTAKING BUT THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE TERM IS US ED MAY SHOW THAT IT IS INTENDED TO INCLUDE SUCH AN ACQUISITION. SEE: HALSBURY'S LAWS OF ENGLAND (4TH EDITION VOLUME 7 PARA 1539). T WO COMPANIES MAY JOIN TO FORM A NEW COMPANY, BUT THERE MAY BE AB SORPTION OR BLENDING OF ONE BY THE OTHER, BOTH AMOUNT TO AMALGA MATION. WHEN TWO COMPANIES ARE MERGED AND ARE SO JOINED, AS TO F ORM A THIRD COMPANY OR ONE IS ABSORBED INTO ONE OR BLENDED WITH ANOTHER, THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY LOSES ITS ENTITY. 12 (IV) FOURTHLY, UPON THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY CEASIN G TO EXIST, IT CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A PERSON UNDER SECTION 2(31) OF THE ACT 1961 AGAINST WHOM ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS CAN BE INI TIATED OR AN ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED; (V) FIFTHLY, A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143 (2) WAS ISS UED ON 26 SEPTEMBER 2013 TO THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY, SPIL, W HICH WAS FOLLOWED BY A NOTICE TO IT UNDER SECTION 142(1); (VI) SIXTHLY, PRIOR TO THE DATE ON WHICH THE JURISD ICTIONAL NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143 (2) WAS ISSUED, THE SCHEME OF AMA LGAMATION HAD BEEN APPROVED ON 29 JANUARY 2013 BY THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 WITH EFFECT FROM 1 APR IL 2012; (VII) SEVENTHLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSUMED JURI SDICTION TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT IN PURSUANCE OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECT ION 143 (2). THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE AMALGAMATI NG COMPANY IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT ON 2 APRIL 2013, THE AMALGAM ATED COMPANY MSIL HAD ADDRESSED A COMMUNICATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER INTIMATING THE FACT OF AMALGAMATION. IN THE ABOVE C ONSPECTUS OF 13 THE FACTS, THE INITIATION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST AN ENTITY WHICH HAD CEASED TO EXIST WAS VOID AB INITIO . IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO THE AMALGAMATING COMPANY I .E. GENPACT INDIA WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME OF CONDUCTIN G ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS ON THE DATE OF PASSING ASSES SMENT ORDER. ONCE IT IS FOUND THAT ASSESSMENT IS FRAMED IN THE N AME OF NON- EXISTING ENTITY, IT DOES NOT REMAIN A PROCEDURAL IR REGULARITY OF THE NATURE WHICH COULD BE CURED BY INVOKING THE PROVISI ONS OF SECTION 292B OF THE ACT. HENCE, THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF ARE VOID AB INITIO. THEREFO RE, ASSESSMENT ORDER IS SET ASIDE. WE ALLOW GROUND NOS. 1, 2 & 3 O F THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO NEED TO GIVE ANY FINDING RELATING TO THE OTHER ISSUES AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF IS VOID AB INITIO. 08. IN LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE TRIBU NAL, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS SET ASIDE. APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS SET A SIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSEE BECOMES NON EST 14 9. IN THE RESULT, BOTH, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REV ENUE IN ITA NO. 379/DEL/2018 IS DISMISSED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE IN ITA NO. 472/DEL/2018 BECOMES NON EST. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01.09. 2021 IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE RIVAL REPRESENTATIVES. SD/- SD/- [ KULDIP SINGH ] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 01 ST SEPTEMBER, 2021 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 15 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER