DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. HFCL Infotel Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 5008/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7855 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P V GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 37(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 25, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) VS. HFCL INFOTEL LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS M/S. QUADRANT TELEVENTURES LTD.), B-71, INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-VII, MOHALI, CHANDIGARH. PAN- AABCT2862R (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. P.V. GUPTA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SH. YOGESH AGRAWAL, CA ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 28.05.2015 OF LD. CIT(A)-I, NEW DELHI FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 0-11 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.57,40,488/- U/S 35ABB OF THE ACT ON EXPENSES INC URRED TOWARDS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST THEREON PAID TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF MEMBERSHIP FEE PAID TO VARIOUS CLUBS AMOUNTING TO RS.96,265/-. DATE OF HEARING 22.04.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24.04.2019 ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 2 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO ADOPT THE LOSS AT FIGU RE OF RS.94,10,62,358/- FOR THE A.Y.210-11 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT T HE ASSESSEE DID NOT CLAIM THE BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.44,26,99,485/- FOR TH E A.Y. 2010-11 AND THUS THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLAIM THE ABOVE BUS INESS LOSS IN VIEW OF THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT GIVEN IN CASE OF GO ETZE (INDIA) LTD. VS. CIT 284 ITR 323. 4. THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, AL TER OR FORGO ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEAL EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 6. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND IS NOT T ENABLE ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. BY WAY OF AFORESAID GROUNDS, THE REVENUE HAS CHA LLENGED THE DELETION OF FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCES : (I). DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.57,40,488/- C LAIMED U/S. 35ABB (II). DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.96,265/- PAID TOWARDS MEMBERSHIP FEE OF VARIOUS CLUBS. (III). DISALLOWANCE OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.44,26,99 ,485/- AS AGAINST RS.94,19,62,358/- CLAIMED. 3. AS REGARDS THE FIRST ISSUE, THE BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CLAIMED A DEDUCTION OF RS. 33,02,68,457/- U/S 35ABB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENTS MADE DEPARTMENT OF TELE COMMUNICATION (DOT) TOWARDS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST THEREON AMO UNTING TO RS. 8,61,07,328/-. AS PER ASSESSING OFFICER, THESE PAYM ENTS, BEING NOT LEGITIMATE ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 3 EXPENDITURE, WERE NOT ADMISSIBLE TO THE ASSESSEE. O N BEING ASKED, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PAYMENT OF L IQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST THEREON OF RS. 8,61,07,328/- IN TERMS OF C LAUSES 12.2 TO 12.4 OF THE LICENSE AGREEMENT DATED 07.11.1997 ENTERED WITH DOT , WHEREBY IT WAS OBLIGATORY ON THE PART OF ASSESSEE TO PAY INTEREST AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IN CASE OF FAILURE TO DELIVER THE SERVICES OR PART THE REOF WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD. AS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY COULD NOT MEET WITH TIME FRAME FOR DELIVERY OF SERVICE, LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST AMOUNTI NG TO RS. 8,61,07,328/- WERE PAID TO DOT, FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIME D 1/15TH DEDUCTION U/S 35- ABB. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE PAYMENT ON ACCO UNT OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST ARE INCURRED AND PAID IN THE COURSE OF OBTAINING THE RIGHTS TO OPERATE TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES AND NOT FOR ANY BREACH/VIOLATION OF ANY LAW. THE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST HAS BEEN P AID IN BUSINESS INTEREST AND COMMERCIAL EXIGENCY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE AND REFERRING TO THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 35ABB, DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE HOLDING THAT LIQUI DATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST PAID THEREON WERE PENAL IN NATURE AND WAS NOT ALLOW ABLE U/S. 35ABB OF THE ACT. 4. REGARDING SECOND ISSUE, THE FACTS ARE THAT THE A SSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF PAYMENTS OF RS.96,265/- MADE TO VARIOUS CLUBS AS MEMBERSHIP FEE, STATING IT TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR TH E PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE SAME OBSERVING THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS TRIED TO LINK THE PERSONAL EXPENSES WITH THE BUSINESS EXPENS ES AND THAT THE ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 4 EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN THE CLUB IS NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. 5. AS REGARDS THE THIRD AND LAST ISSUE, THE FACTS A RE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS STATED TO HAVE CLAIMED BUSINESS LOSS AT RS.94,10,62 ,358/-IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN, HOWEVER, REF LECTED CURRENT YEAR LOSS AS RS.49,83,62,873/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREF ORE, TOOK THE FIGURE OF LOSS AS REFLECTED IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN, I.E., R S.49,83,62,873/- AS AGAINST RS.94,10,62,358/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, DELETE D THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCES VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER. AGGRIEVED, THE R EVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. THE LEARNED DR RELYING ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER S UBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWAN CE CLAIMED U/S. 35ABB IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SATISFY THE CONDITIONS ENVISAGED UNDER THAT SECTION, AS ENUMERATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE TOWARDS MEMBERSHIP FEE OF VA RIOUS CLUBS WAS NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RIGHTLY TAKEN THE BUSINESS LOSS AS CLAIMED BY A SSESSEE AS PER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN AND THEREFORE, THE CLAIM WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED IN ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 5 THE RETURN WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN VIEW OF DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE (INDIA) LTD. VS. CIT 284 ITR 323 . 8. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, S UPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE FIRST TWO ISSUES ARE S QUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASES OF ASSESSEE ITSELF FOR A.YRS. 2002-03 TO 2008-09. IT W AS SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS DUE TO SOME TECHNICAL ERROR IN THE E-RETURN FILING UTIL ITY SYSTEM THAT CURRENT YEAR LOSS WAS WRONGLY REFLECTED AS RS.49,83,62,873/- INS TEAD OF CORRECT LOSS OF RS.94,10,62,358/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RE TURN. 9. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING ENTI RE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT FIRST TWO ISSUES REGARDING DISALLOWANCE O F DEDUCTION OF RS.57,40,488/- CLAIMED U/S. 35ABB AND DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.96,265/- PAID TOWARDS MEMBERSHIP FEE TO VARIOUS CLUBS ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATE 31.07.2017 IN THE CA SES OF ASSESSEE ITSELF FOR A.YRS.2002-03 TO 2008-09 (COPY PLACED ON RECORD), O BSERVING AS UNDER : 3.6 CONSIDERING ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT UN DISPUTEDLY PAYMENT OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST CHARGES THEREON HAV E BEEN MADE AS PER CLAUSES 12.2 TO 12.4 OF THE AFORE-MENTIONED LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN, THE ASSESSEE AND DOT, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN MADE OBLIGATO RY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO PAY INTEREST AND LIQUIDATED DAM AGES IN CASE OF FAILURE TO DELIVER THE SERVICES OR PART THEREOF WITHIN THE PERIOD PRESCRIBED. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND INTEREST THEREON HAVE BEEN M ADE TO DOT DUE TO NON-FULFILLMENT OF OBLIGATIONS SPECIFIED IN THE AGR EEMENT IN TIME, WHERE TIME WAS AN ESSENCE. THESE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN INCURR ED IN THE COURSE OF ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 6 OBTAINING THE RIGHTS TO OPERATE TELECOMMUNICATION S ERVICES AND NOT FOR ANY BREACH / VIOLATION OF ANY LAW. AS PER THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. INDO ASIAN SWITCH GEARS P. LTD. (SUPRA) THE PAYMENT OF D AMAGES IS FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NOT ON ACCOUNT OF INFRACTION OF LAW AN D, THEREFORE, THE SAME IS ADMISSIBLE AS EXPENSES HAVING BEEN EXPENDED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF BUSINESS. WHEN WE EXAMINE THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE ABOVE CITED DECI SION, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS PAID LIQUIDATED DA MAGES AND INTEREST THEREON DUE TO BREACH OF THE AGREEMENT AND NOT AS A BREACH OF LAW. THUS, THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED DOES NOT FALL WITHIN EXPLAN ATION TO SECTION 37(1) OF THE ACT. AND SINCE IT WAS INCIDENTAL TO BUSINESS , IT CANNOT BE DISALLOWED. THE ID. CIT (A) WAS THUS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DI SALLOWANCE IN QUESTION. THE SAME IS UPHELD. THE ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ISSUE NO. 2 [DISALLOWANCE OF CLUB EXPENSES] : T HE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE DISALLOWANCE OF CLUB EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION ON THE BASIS THAT THE CLUB EXPE NDITURE WAS NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY INCURRED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO SUSPECTED PERSONAL ELEMENT IN THE EXPENDITURE. 4.1 IN SUPPORT OF THE RELATED GROUND ON THE ISSUE THE ID. CIT [DR] HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER STRESSED THAT EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVE LY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THE ID. CIT (A) HAS NOT SPECIFIED HOW SUCH FINDING OF FACT IS NOT CORRECT. SHE CONTENDED THAT ALLOWABILITY UNDER SECT ION 37(1) DEPENDS ON AS TO WHETHER THE EXPENDITURE IS WHOLLY FOR BUSINESS. 4.2 THE ID. AR, ON THE OTHER HAND, PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER AND REITERATED SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE SUBMITTED THAT EXPENSES WERE INCURRED TOWARDS THE ANNUAL CORPORATE MEMBERSHIP FOR VARIOUS CLUBS AND R EFERRED PAGE NO. 12 OF THE PAPER BOOK IN SUPPORT. THE ID. AR CONTENDED T HAT ALL CLUB EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE P URPOSE OF BUSINESS, TO PROMOTE AND FOSTER BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY. THE EXPE NSES, HAVE BEEN ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 7 INCURRED FOR THE CLUB MEMBERSHIP OF DIFFERENT EMPLO YEES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. CLUBS BEING COMMON SPECIAL PLOTFORM ARE BA SED FOR THE OFFICIALS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO DEVELOP CONTRACT FOR PRO MOTING INTEREST OF THE COMPANY AND PROMOTE BUSINESS. HE CITED FOLLOWING DE CISIONS IN SUPPORT (I) HERO HONDO MOTORS LTD. VS. JCIT 103 ITD 157 (DEL .); (II) JCIT VS. MUKAND 291 ITR 249 (MUM.) (SB); (III) GUJARAT PETRO SYNTHESIS LTD. VS. DCIT 76 ITD 2 57 (AHD.); (IV) CIT VS. SAMTEL COLOUR LTD. 2009 - TMI - 32263 (DELHI HIGH COURT); 4.3 CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS AND THE DECIS IONS CITED IN SUPPORT WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER ON THE ISSUE AS CONSIDERING THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED AND NATURE OF INDUSTRY, THE AMOUNT INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CORPORATE CLUB MEMBERS HIP FEES IS HELD FOR BUSINESS PROMOTION, THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER IN THI S REGARD IS THUS UPHELD. THE ISSUE IS THUS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELATED GROUNDS OF THE APPEALS ARE ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. THUS, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISION OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CA SE, BOTH THESE ISSUES ARE DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE R EVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE CHALLENGING THESE ISS UES ARE DISMISSED. 10. ADVERTING TO THE LAST ISSUE REGARDING DISALLOWA NCE OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.44,26,99,485/- AS AGAINST RS.94,10,62,358/- CLAI MED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS BORN OUT ON RECORD THAT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE A SSESSEE HAD TAKEN A PLEA THAT CURRENT YEARS LOSS IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETUR N GENERATED BY THE INCOME- TAX DEPARTMENT IS REFLECTING AS RS.49,83,62,873/- A S AGAINST RS. 94,10,62,358/- DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE EXAMINED THE SCHE DULE BP OF ITR-6 REGARDING COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PR OFESSION AND WE FIND THAT ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 8 AT SR. NO. 12(II), THE ASSESSEE HAS MENTIONED THE F IGURE OF RS.49,83,62,873/- UNDER THE HEAD DEPRECIATION ALLOWABLE U/S. 32(1)(I) . THIS FIGURE IS FILLED MANUALLY BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE FILING ITR-6. HOWEVE R, SCHEDULE DPM & SCHEDULE DOA PERTAINING TO DEPRECIATION OF PLANT & MACHINERY AND DEPRECIATION ON OTHER ASSETS, ARE LYING BLANK. IT I S NOT UNDERSTANDABLE AS TO WHY THESE SCHEDULES WERE KEPT BLANK BY THE ASSESSEE WHE N HE HAS CLAIMED DEPRECIATION. THIS MAY ALSO AFFECT THE BUSINESS LOS SES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN SCHEDULE CYLA LOSSES TO BE ADJUSTED IS REFLE CTED OF RS.94,10,62,358/- AND SCHEDULE CFL IS ALSO REFLECTING THE LOSSES OF CUR RENT YEAR AS AT SL. NO. (XI) OF RS.94,10,62,358/-. SAME FIGURE OF (-94,10,62,398) I N SCHEDULE BP AT COLUMN (C) UNDER COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PR OFESSION. HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF THIS SCHEDULE BP OF ITR-6, WE FIND THA T THERE ARE DISTORTED FIGURES AT VARIOUS SERIAL NOS. OF THIS SCHEDULE. FOR EXAMPL E, THE FIGURE SHOWN AT SL. NO. 24 OF THIS SCHEDULE IS RS.42,79,17,101/-, WHICH IS THE TOTAL OF SL. NOS. 14 TO 23, WHEREAS NO FIGURE IS MENTION IN INNER COLUMNS OF TH ESE SERIAL NUMBERS. THESE FIGURES AND COLUMNS OF ITR-6 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE NEED TO BE THOROUGHLY EXAMINED AND VERIFIED AT THE STAGE OF ASSESSING OFF ICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ALSO REQUIRED TO EXAMINE AND VERIFY THE FIGURE OF D EPRECIATION OF RS.79,97,78,815/- MENTIONED AT SL. NO. 11 AND AT S L. NO. 12(II) OF RS.49,83,62,873/- OF SCHEDULE BP WHEREAS IN PROFI T AND LOSS ACCOUNT, THE AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION IS SHOWN AT RS.95,01,65,233/ - AT SL. NO. 42. ALL THESE DISTORTED FIGURES SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF THE ASSESS EE NEED TO BE EXAMINED AND VERIFIED THOROUGHLY BY THE AO BEFORE ARRIVING AT CO RRECT BUSINESS LOSSES ADMISSIBLE TO THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT F IND ANY JUSTIFICATION IN THE DIRECTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO TAKE THE BUSINESS LO SS OF RS.94,10,62,358/-. ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FIL E OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ITA NO. 5008/DEL/2015 9 MAKING PROPER VERIFICATION OF THE FIGURES RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITR-6 AS NOTED ABOVE AND THEREAFTER HE SHALL WORK OUT CORREC T BUSINESS PROFIT/LOSSES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO RECONCILE ALL THE FIGURES SHOWN IN ITR- 6. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.04.2019. SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (L.P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 24.04.19 *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