M/s. NBCC Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4846/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3765 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RENU AMITABH
• Assessee Lawyers: DR RAKESH GUPTA
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Principle of natural justice; Period of limitation; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 142(1); 37(1); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH E , NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 - 08 M/S. N.B.C. C. LTD., C/O RRA TAXINDIA, D - 28, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART - I, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AAACN3053B) (APPELLANT) VS. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 13(1), NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY DR. RAKESH GUPTA, ADVOCATE AND SH. SOMIL AGARWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY MS. RENU AMITABH, CIT/DR ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.07.2014 OF LD. CIT(A) - XVI, DELHI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN FRAMING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143 (3) R.W.S. 147 WITHOUT ASSUMING JURISDICTION AS PER LAW AND WITHOUT SERVING MAN DATORY NOTICES U/S 148, 143(2) AND 142(1) AS PER LAW AND WITHOUT RECORDING VALID REASONS IN THE EYES OF LAW AND WITHOUT RECORDING REQUISITE SATISFACTION AS PER LAW AND WITHOUT OBTAINING REQUISITE APPROVAL AS PER LAW AND WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE MANDATORY CONDITIONS U/S 147 TO 151 AS ENVISAGED UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 AND THE SAME IS BARRED BY LIMITATION. DATE OF HEARING 21.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31 . 10.2017 ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 2 2. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN M AKING ADDITION OF RS.4,47,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ACCRUED DURING THE YEAR THAT TOO BY DISREGARDING THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER, ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO I N MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,47,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ACCRUED IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMIN G THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.42,35,48,000/ - BEING THE AMOUNT FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION LOSS U/S 37(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND THAT TOO BY DISREGARDING THE SUBMISSION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONTRARY TO THE JUDGMENT OF HO N'BLE SUPREME COURT. 5. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER, ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.42,35,48,000/ - BEING THE AMOUNT FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION LOSS IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN FRAMING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN AS MUCH AS PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY RECORDING INCORRECT FACTS AND FINDINGS. 7. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234 B AND 234D OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. BY WAY OF GROUND NO. 1, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF PROCEEDING INITIATED WITHOUT PROPER ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION U/S. 147, ON THE PREMISE OF (I) NON - SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S. 148, 143(2) AND 142(1); (I ) RECORDING OF INVALID REASONS; (III) FAILURE TO RECORD REQUISITE SATISFACTION; (IV) ISSUANCE OF ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 3 PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT OBTAINING REQUISITE APPROVAL; AND (V) ISSUANCE OF PROCEEDINGS BEYOND THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION. 3. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER REVEALS THAT THE ISSUE REGARDING NON - SERVICE OF NOTICES U/S. 148, 143(2) AND 142(1) UPON THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PRESSED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AS CATEGORICALLY MENTIONED IN PARA 4.1.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THIS FACT, CATEGORICALLY MENTIONED IN THE IM PUGNED ORDER , IS NOT PROVED TO BE FALSE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, KEEPING IN VIEW THE SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT LEGAL GROUND CAN BE RAISED AT ANY STAGE, WE ARE INCLINED TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE AT THIS STAGE. AS REGARD S THE SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S. 148, WE OBSERVE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CATEGORICALLY MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS DULY ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST WHICH NO MATERIAL IS BROUGHT ON RECORD ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSEE IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL HAS ALSO OBJECTED THAT NOTICE U/S. 143(2) AND 142(1) WERE ALSO NOT SERVED UPON HIM. THOUGH THERE IS NO MATERIAL BEFORE US TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER SUCH NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERVED, BUT IT IS DISCERNIBLE FROM THE RECO RD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS COOPERATING WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO REPLIED IN RESPONSE TO THIS NOTICE THAT THE RETURN ORIGINALLY FILED BE DEEMED TO BE FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED VARIOUS REPLIES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. MOREOVER, ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 4 THE FACTUM OF NON - SERVICE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2) NOWHERE FINDS PLACE IN THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 292BB OF THE IT ACT, THE ASSESSEE STANDS PRECLUDED TO OBJECT THE SERVICE OF ANY NOTICE IN ORDER TO VITIATE THE RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ACCORDINGLY, THIS CONTENTION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO FAIL. THE REMAINING ISSUES REGARD ING NON - SATISFACTION OF THE CONDITIONS ENVISAGED U/S. 147 TO 151 AND THE NOTICE BEING BEYOND THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION, TOO HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WITH CATEGORICAL OBSERVATION THAT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED BY THE AO U/S . 148 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 AFTER DULY RECORDING OF THE REASONS. NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED AND DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON 23.03.2012 IN RESPONSE TO WHICH AR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY APPEARED BEFORE THE AO FROM TIME TO TIME. SINCE THE NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS ISSUED ON 23.03.2012 WITHIN FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT A.Y. 2007 - 08 , THEREFORE, THE NOTICE BEING WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT NOTICE WAS BARRED BY LIMITATION IS WITHOUT ANY MERIT. NO CONTRA RY MATERIAL IS LAID ON RECORD ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCARD THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, FIND NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION REACHED BY FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON THIS COUNT. ACCORDINGLY, THE LEGAL GROUND R AISED BEFORE US DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED SANS MERIT AND WE HOLD THAT THE OBJECTION ON ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 5 VALIDITY OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147/148 INITIATED BY ASSESSING OFFICER, IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON THESE COUNTS. 4. ADVERTING TO THE MERITS OF ADDITIONS, WE FIND THAT TWO ADDITIONS MADE IN REASSESSMENT ORDER ARE UNDER CHALLENGE BEFORE US IN THIS APPEAL. THESE ADDITIONS ARE (I) RS.4.47 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON DISPUTED ARBITRATION AWARDS NOT DECLARED AS INCOME BY ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR AND (II) DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 4 2,35,48,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION LOSS, CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE. 5. IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.4.47 CRORES, COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA COMMENTED AS UNDER : THIS IS UNDERSTATED BY RS.4.47 CRORES DUE TO NON - ACCOUNTAL OF IN TEREST RECOVERABLE FROM THE CLIENTS IN RESPECT OF CLOSED PROJECTS AS THE COURT/ARBITRATION CASES WERE CONFIRMED IN FAVOUR OF THE CORPORATION IN NOV., 2006 AND JAN., 2007 FOR WHICH DEMANDS WERE ALSO RAISED DURING THAT PERIOD. CONSEQUENTLY, THE PROFIT FOR TH E YEAR IS ALSO UNDERSTATED BY THE SAME AMOUNT. 6. IT WAS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS R AISED A DEMAND ON THE BASIS OF COURT ARBITRA TION AWARD CONFIR MED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006 - 07, WHICH WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS ADOPTED MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING. THEREFORE, IT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE AO AS THE INCOME OF ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 6 THE C URRENT YEAR WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE S CONTENTION WAS THAT IT WOULD BE TAXED IN THE YEAR OF RECEIPT. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THIS AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE LD. CIT(A) IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ALSO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF THE INTEREST ON ACCRUAL BASIS AS OBSERVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT SOMETIMES ARBITRATION AWARDS ARE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND SOMETIMES AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, AS A MATTER OF CONSISTENT ACCOUNTIN G POLICY, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BOOKS THE INTEREST INCOME AS WELL AS INTEREST EXPENDITURE ON ACTUAL RECEIPT OR ON ACTUAL PAYMENT BASIS ONLY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THESE AWARDS ARE SUBJECTED TO FURTHER JUDICIAL REVIEW AND THERE IS ALWAYS GROSS UNCERTAINTY WI TH RESPECT TO REALIZATION OF ANY SUCH INTEREST INCOME. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER LAW ALSO, THIS AMOUNT CANNOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, AS IT HAS NEITHER BEEN RECEIVED NOR ACCRUED DURING THIS YEAR. IT WAS NEXT STATED THAT TH IS AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 AND ACCOUNTED FOR AS AN INCOME IN THAT YEAR. HE ALSO RELIED ON ACCOUNTING STANDARD 9 ISSUED BY INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA (ICAI) AND THE CASE LAW IN CIT VS. VISHNU INDUSTRIAL GAS ES (P) LTD., ITA NO. 229/1988 DATED 06.05.2008 (DELHI HIGH COURT) AND CIT VS. DINESH KUMAR GOEL, 331 ITR 10 (DEL.). ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 7 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 9. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE OBSERVE THAT THE INTEREST OF RS.4.47 CRORES HAS BEEN AWARDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN THREE CASES, WHICH IS ON PAPER BOOK PAGE 142 . THIS AWARD WAS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF CHALLENGE BEFORE THE HIGHER FORUM S TILL EXPIRY OF RELEVANT PERIOD OF LIMITATION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LEGALLY OBLIGED TO DECLARE SUCH RECEIPTS AS THEIR INCOME BEFORE THE ACTUAL RECEIPT OF SUCH INCOME BECAUSE BEFORE THE ACTUAL RECEIPTS OF THE AMOUNT AWARDED, THE SAME REMAINED UNCERTAIN. THE LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION AT PAGE 142 THAT OUT OF THREE CASES, THE AWARD IN THE CASE OF NDCC, PH - II, NDMC, NEW DELHI WAS MADE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE ON 27.01.2007 WHICH HAS BEEN FURTHER CHALLENGED BY NDMC AND REST TWO AWARDS WERE RECEIVED ON 17.07.2007 AND 06.06.2007 WHICH HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AS INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN F.Y. 2007 - 08. THE CASE LAWS RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE, THEREFORE, APPLICABLE IN TH E INSTANT CASE. THE ASSESSEE HAS CORRECTLY RECORDED SUCH RECEIPTS AS INCOME IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT BRING ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE WHETHER IT HAS BEEN OFFERED FOR TAX OR NOT DURING THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THEREFOR E, THIS ASPECT NEEDS VERIFICATION AT THE STAGE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE AO TO VERIFY ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 8 THE SAME AND ACT IN THE LIGHT OF OBSERVATIONS GIVEN IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDER ABOVE. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION LOSS, THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED RS.4235.48 LACS AS A FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION LOSS ON YEAR TO YEAR BASIS AS PER ACCOUNTING POLICY FOLLOWED BY THE CORPORATION. THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE LOSS ES WERE IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH WERE RECOVERABLE FROM THE CUSTOMERS AT THE YEAR END AS ON 31.03.2007. THIS AMOUNT WHICH WAS TO BE RECEIVED IN FOREIGN CURRENCY IS REQUIRED TO BE REINSTATED IN INDIAN CURRE NCY AS ON THE DATE OF BALANCE SHEET IN TERMS OF ACCOUNTING STANDARD ISSUED BY ICAI. THEREFORE, THERE WAS LOSS ON THE BALANCE SHEET WHICH HAS BEEN DEBITED BY THE ASSESSEE INTO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. THESE ASPECTS WERE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DUR ING THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3). THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED ITS REPLY IN TERMS OF QUESTIONNAIRE AT SL. NO. 28 DATED 18.09.2009. THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED REPLY WHICH IS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGE 80 TO 82 ALONG WITH ANNEXURE - 1 7. ALL THE DETAILS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THIS ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE DISALLO WED AGAIN ON REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ADOPTING SAME METHOD OF ACCOUNTING WITH ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 9 RESPECT TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION GAIN/LOSSES AND THIS METHOD WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THEREF ORE, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO CHANGE ITS VIEW ON THE NATURE OF ACCOUNTING ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THERE IS NO ADVERSE FINDING FROM THE REVENUE SIDE ABOUT THE CORRECTNESS OR COMPLETENESS OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ARE ADMITTEDLY COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRACTICE AND GUIDELINES NOTIFIED. THE ASSESSEE HAD INTER ALIA APPLIED AS 11 DEALING WITH EFFECTS OF THE CHANGES IN THE EXCHANGE RATE TO RECORD THE LOSSES INCURRED OWING TO FLUCTUATION IN THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE. AS 11 ENJOINS REPORTING OF MONETARY ITEMS DENOMINATED IN FOREIGN CURRENCY USING THE CLOSING RATE AT THE END OF THE ACCOUNTING YEAR. IT ALSO REQ UIRES THAT ANY DIFFERENCE, LOSS OR GAIN, ARISING FROM SUCH CONVERSION OF THE LIABILITY AT THE CLOSING RATE SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE REPORTING PERIOD. SIMILARLY, CBDT NOTIFICATION ON INCOME COMPUTATION AND DISCLOSURE STAN DARDS ALSO, INTER ALIA, DEALS WITH RECOGNITION OF EXCHANGE DIFFERENCES. THE NOTIFICATION ALSO SETS OUT THAT THE EXCHANGE DIFFERENCE ARISING ON FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS HAVE TO BE RECOGNIZED AS INCOME OR BUSINESS EXPENSES IN THE PERIOD IN WHICH THEY AR ISE SUBJECT TO EXCEPTION AS SET OUT IN SECTION 43A OF THE ACT OR RULE 115 OF THE INCOME - TAX RULES, 1962, AS THE CASE MAY BE. IN VIEW OF ITA NO. 4846/DEL./2014 10 THE VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT AND THE IT ACT, IT WAS MANDATORY TO DRAW ACCOUNTS AS PER AS - 11. THUS, THE LO SS RECOGNIZED ON ACCOUNT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION AS PER NOTIFIED AS 11 IS AN ACCRUED AND SUBSISTING LIABILITY AND NOT MERELY A CONTINGENT OR A HYPOTHETICAL LIABILITY. WE ACCORDINGLY OBSERVE THAT THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED TO DISALLOW THE FOREIGN EXCHA NGE FLUCTUATION LOSS IN THE INSTANT CASE. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.10.2017 . SD/ - SD/ - ( BHAVNESH SAINI ) (L.P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31.10.2017 *AKS* COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI