M/s. Sterling Agro Industries Ltd., New Delhi V. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 6310/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3910 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST IMPUGNED DATED PASSED
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 10

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.:- 6310/DEL /2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. 11 TH FLOOR, AGGARWAL CYBER PLAZA- II NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI 110 034 PAN AAACS2278R VS. ADDL. CIT RANGE-9, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.09.2014, PASSED BY LD. CIT (APPEALS) XII, NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S 14 3(3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ASS ESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- ASSESSEE BY: NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI KAUSHLENDRA TIWARI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 24/10/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24/10/2017 ITA NO. 6310/DEL/2014 STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. ACIT 2 1. THAT LEVY OF TAX ON DIVIDEND FROM EQUITY SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS WHICH ARE EXEMPT U/S 10 (34) AND 10(35) OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS AGAINST THE LAW. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN ASSESSING CO RRECTLY THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W BY NOT ALLOWING EXEMPTION ON AN EXEMPT ITEM I.E. DIVIDEND RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR BUT INADVERTENTLY INCLUDED IN ITS T AXABLE INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 3. THAT LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW BY REJECTING THE RIGHTFUL AND GENUINE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY NOT ALLOWING RECTI FYING THE ASSESSMENT AND ALLOWING EXEMPTION ON THE WHOLE OF T HE DIVIDEND INCOME, WHICH LAPSE WAS DULY BROUGHT TO TH E NOTICE OF THE LD. A.O. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS U/S 143(2). 2. THE BRIEF FACTS QUA THE ISSUE INVOLVED THAT ASSES SEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME HAS CLAIMED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS. 88,77,160/- AS EXEMPT. HOWEVER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS, THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2013 MADE ADDITIONAL CLAIM OF FURTHER EXEMPTION OF RS. 47,82,584/- ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS ALSO DIVIDEND INCOME EARNED DURING THE YEAR WHICH IS EXE MPT U/S 10(34) AND 10(35) AND THE SAME COULD NOT BE PROPERLY COMPUTE D AT THE TIME OF FILING OF REVISED RETURN. A.O. DISALLOWED THE ADDI TIONAL CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT SAME SHOULD HAVE BE EN MADE BY WAY OF REVISED RETURN AND APPLYING THE RATIO OF HONBL E SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE INDIA LTD. VS. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC) DISALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. ITA NO. 6310/DEL/2014 STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. ACIT 3 3. LD. CIT (A) TOO FOLLOWING THE SAME JUDGMENT OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE S ERVICE OF NOTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 5. THE SOLE DISPUTE BEFORE US IS THAT, WHETHER ADDITION AL CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR EXEMPTION OF DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS. 47,82,584/- CAN BE ENTERTAINED OR NOT AS ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE THIS CLAIM BY WAY OF REVISED RETURN. FROM THE PERUSAL OF TH E IMPUGNED ORDER IT IS SEEN THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT TOTAL EXEMPT I NCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSE IS RS. 1,36,59,745/- IN THE FO RM OF DIVIDEND, OUT OF WHICH SUM OF RS. 47,82,584/- WAS CLAIMED BY WAY OF LETTER FILED BEFORE THE A.O. ON 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2013. THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT (A) HAVE REFUSED TO ENTERTAIN THE CLAIM DESPITE THE FACT THAT SU CH AN INCOME IS NOT TAXABLE AFTER FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID D OWN IN THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE INDIA LTD. VS. CIT (SUPRA). HOWEVER THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HA S HELD THAT SUCH CLAIM CAN BE ALLOWED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY INCLUDING THE TRIBUNAL AND IT DOES NOT IMPINGE UPON THE POWERS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES TO ENTERTAIN FOR THE FIRST TIME A POINT OF LAW PROVIDED THE FACTS ARE ON THE RECORD. THUS, THE LD. CIT (A) SHOULD HAVE EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND ALLOW THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE W ITH THE LAW. ITA NO. 6310/DEL/2014 STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. ACIT 4 SINCE THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT DIVIDEND INCOME TO THE EX TENT OF RS. 47,82,584/- WAS LEFT TO BE CLAIMED IN THE RETURN OF INC OME, THEREFORE, THE SAME CAN BE ALLOWED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES IN CLUDING THIS TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND GRANT EXEMPTION OF DIVIDEND INCOME U/S 1 0(34) / 10(35). 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH OCTOBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 31 /10/2017 VEENA COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI