IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.394&395/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17& 2017-18 Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. C/o. M/s. Nangia and Co. LLP, A-109, Sector-136, Noida PAN no.AAOCS2525F Vs ACIT Circle – 3 (1) (2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No.396/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sheraton International LLC C/o Nangial & LLP A-109, Sector-136, Noida Vs DCIT Circle – 3 (1) (2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No.397&398/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Starwood (M) International Inc. Noida C/o. M/s. Nangia and Co. LLP, A-109, Sector-136, Noida PAN no.AANCS4030J Vs ACIT Circle – 3 (1) (2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 ITA No.399 & 400/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Sheraton Overseas Management Corporation Delhi C/o. M/s. Nangia and Co. LLP, A-109, Sector-136, Noida PAN No.AALCS8306H Vs ACIT Circle – 3 (1) (2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant Sh. Amit Arora, CA Sh. Vishal Mishra, CA Respondent Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT DR Sh. Sanjay Kumar, SR. DR Date of hearing: 15/09/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 15/09/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: The captioned appeals by the assessee are preferred against separate orders of the CIT(A) in the captioned assessment years. 2. Since identical issues are involved in the captioned appeals they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3 3. Since identical grounds have been taken in the captioned appeals for the sake of our convenience. We are taking grounds of ITA No.394/Del/2022 pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17:- 4 5 4. At the very outset the Counsel for the assessee stated that identical grievance have been considered by this Tribunal in a bunch of appeals bearing ITA No.2011,2012,2013,2015, 9265, 9689/Del/2019 in order dated 29.04.2022 and has decided the quarrel in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 5. The DR could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the revenue. 6. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the Counsel because identical grievance have been heard and decided by this Tribunal (supra) in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The relevant findings read as under :- 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 7. Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench (supra) we direct the AO to delete the addition. 8. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. 21 9. Decision announced in the open court on 15.09.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA, Sr. Private Secretary* Date:- .09.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Date of dictation 15.09.2022 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member 15.09.2022 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other member 15.09.2022 Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 19.09.2022 Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement 19.09.2022 Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/ PS 19.09.2022 Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT 19.09.2022 Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 19.09.2022 Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. The date on which file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order