UNITECH HOLDINGS LTD., NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4270/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9543 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: H K CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Notional interest
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI G BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4270/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 UNITECH HOLDINGS LTD., C/O-LUTHRA & LUTHRA LAW OFICES, 103, ASHOKA ESTATE, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. PAN-AAACU0237C VS DCIT, CRICLE-27(1), NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH.H.K.CHAUDHARY, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING 28.07.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.07.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2012-13 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-10, NEW DE LHI DATED 30.03.2017. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) (LD. CIT(A)) UNDER SECTION 250(6) OF TH E ACT IS BAD IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED A SSESSING OFFICER CHARGING NOTIONAL INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS.13,80,08 ,663/- ON SHARE APPLICATION MONEY ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT TO ITS SUBSIDIARY/JOINT VENTURE/ASSOCIATE COMPANIES. 3. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A TO THE EXTENT OF EXEMPT INCOME I.E. RS.289,315/-. ITA NO.4270/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 PAGE | 2 4. THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEALS ARE INDEPENDENT AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ONE ANOTHER. 2. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TI ME OF HEARING. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT THROUGH SPEED POST TO TH E ADDRESS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS RETURNED BACK WITH REMARK REFUSED TO TAKE DELIVERY OF THE LETTER . THE NOTICE IS RETURNED BACK UNSERVED. 3. LD. CIT DR SUBMITTED THAT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BE DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. CIT DR AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT APPEAR ED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTING THE PRESENT APPEAL. SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICES THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B. N. BHATTACHARYA (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) AND DECISION OF DELHI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL.). WE HEREBY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED ON CONCLUSION OF VIRT UAL HEARING ON 28 TH JULY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (DR.B.R.R.KUMAR) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* ITA NO.4270/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 PAGE | 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI