ACIT, Circle- 20(2), New Delhi V. QNS Facility Management Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6357/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9190 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 12-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKITA
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6357/DEL/2017 [A.Y. 2013-14] The A.C.I.T. Vs. QNS Facility Management Pvt Ltd Circle 20(2) 6, Community Centre, Saket New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACU 1291 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Ankita, CA Department By : Shri Kipgen, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 09.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 09.02.2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-07, New Delhi dated 31.07.2017 pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2 2. The grievances of the Revenue read as under: “1. Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting disallowance of Rs. 6,00,01,073/-, ignoring the fact that the total maintenance charges received by the appellant irrespective of its nomenclature constitutes revenue receipts and appropriation out of the same for so called sinking funds cannot be allowed as deduction. 2. Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting disallowance of Rs. 6,00,01,073/-, being amount transferred to asset replacement account from the maintenance fees & charges ignoring the fact that the assessee is not the owner of the property and plant/ equipments installed in the complex and it adopted this method to avoid being taxed on the amount by way of a colourable device, as the utilization amount is Rs. 1.06 crores out of transferred amount of Rs. 6,0,01,176/- during the year. 3. Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 9,15,842/- made by the AO u/s 14A r.w.r 8D of the I T Act, 1961 by ignoring the mandatory provisions of section 14A r.w.r 8D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Whether on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) erred in law by deleting the addition/disallowance of Rs. 19,66,540/- made by the AO u/s 2(24)(X) r.w.s 36(l)(va) on account of 3 delayed payment of EPF and ESIC, ignoring the clarification issued by the binding Circular No. 22/2015 of CBDT. 5. The appellant craves to be allowed to add any fresh ground(s) of appeal and/or delete or amend any of the ground(s) of appeal.” 3. Representatives were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. 4. Facts, as culled out from the assessment order, show that the assessee company is engaged in the business of facilities management. The assessee company is a part of the Unitech Group. It would be pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 10856/2016 in the case of Bhupinder Singh Vs. Unitech Ltd wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the proposal of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India vide its order dated 20.01.2020 whereby the erstwhile management of Unitech was superseded and constitution of new management was approved. The relevant extract of the order is as under: “Clause vii - Pending further orders of this Court, there shall be a moratorium against the institution of proceedings against Unitech Limited and its subsidiaries. The moratorium shall also extend to existing proceedings against the company as well as the enforcement of orders that may have been passed against the company.” 4 5. In light of the aforementioned judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the Revenue to approach this Tribunal once the moratorium period is over as per the provisions of law. 6. In the result, with the above directions, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 09.02.2022 in the present of both the rival representatives. Sd/- Sd/- [AMIT SHUKLA] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 09 th February, 2022. 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi 5 Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order