Fast Booking India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5341/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4255 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHISH GOEL

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO S . 5340 & 5341 /DEL/20 1 6 A.Y RS. : 200 8 - 0 9 & 2009 - 10 FAST BOOKING INDIA PVT. LTD., FLAT NO. 206, A-13, KAILASH COLONY, NEW DELHI 110 048 (PAN: AAACF9909L) VS ACIT, CIRCLE 9(1), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MS. RANO JAIN, ADV. & SH. ASHISH GOEL, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MS. ASHIMA NEB, SR. DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM PER H.S. SIDHU, JM PER H.S. SIDHU, JM PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS AGAINST THE COMMON IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.8.2016 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-37, NEW DELHI, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 & 2009-10. SINCE THE ISSUE S INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND IDENTICAL, HENCE, THE APPEAL S WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, BY DEALING WITH ITA NO. 5340/DEL/2016 (AY 2008-09). THE SOLITARY GROUND RAISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS RELATES UPHOLDING THE LE VY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXEMPTION UND ER SECTION 10 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS THE ACT). 2 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT DISPUTED FOR THE S AKE OF BREVITY. 3. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT PURSUAN T TO THE ORDER DATED 02.9.2015 OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN ITA NO . 334 OF 2015, 338 OF 2015 339 OF 2015 AND 342 OF 2015, THE ITAT B BENCH, NE W DELHI VIDE ORDER DATED 14.01.2016 PASSED IN C.O. NO. 125 & 145/DEL/2013 AR ISING OUT OF ITA NO. 116/DEL/2013 & 315/DEL/2012 (AYRS. 2009-10 & 2008-0 9) IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE SET ASIDE THE QUANTUM ADDITION AND RESTORED B ACK THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE ASSESSEES CLAIM U/S. 10A. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT IN PURSUANCE TO THE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 14.01.2016 O F THE ITAT, NEW DELHI, THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED U/S. 254 /143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 HAS ALLOWED THE EXEMPTION U/S. 10A IN RES PECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THEREFORE, SHE STATED THAT PENALTY IN DIS PUTE DOES NOT STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW. HENCE, THE PENALTY IN DISPUTE MAY BE DELETED BY ALLOWING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS O F THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND OPPOSED THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE A SSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURTS ORDER, TRIBUNALS ORDER AS WELL AS ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 254/143(3) OF THE ACT, AS ME NTIONED ABOVE. WE FIND CONSIDERABLE COGENCY IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSE SSEES COUNSEL THAT PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 02.9.2015 OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT PASSED IN ITA NO. 334 OF 2015, 338 OF 2015 339 OF 2015 AND 342 OF 2015, THE ITAT B BENCH, NEW DELHI VIDE ORDER DATED 14.01.2016 PASSED IN C.O. NO. 125 & 145/DEL/2013 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 116/DEL/2013 & 315/DEL/2012 (AYRS. 2009-10 & 2008-09) IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE HAS SET A SIDE THE QUANTUM 3 ADDITION AND RESTORED BACK THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE ASSESSEES CLAIM U/S. 10A OF THE ACT. WE FURTHER FI ND THAT IN PURSUANCE TO THE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 14.01.2016 OF THE ITAT, NEW D ELHI, THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED U/S. 254/143(3) OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, 1961 HAS ALLOWED THE EXEMPTION U/S. 10A IN RESPECT OF ASSESS MENT YEAR 2008-09 AND ASSESSED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 5,51,88 3/-. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE THE PENALTY IN QUESTION D OES NOT STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW. HENCE, THE PENALTY IN DISPUTE STANDS DELETED IN BOTH THE APPEALS. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSE E STAND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 05/01/2018. S SS SD DD D/ // /- -- - S SS SD DD D/ // /- -- - [T.S. KAPOOR] [T.S. KAPOOR] [T.S. KAPOOR] [T.S. KAPOOR] [ [[ [H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU] ]] ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR DATE: 05/01/2018 COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES