ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Sahara India Mass Communication, Lucknow

ITA 64/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5187 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN GOTRU SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDEEP SINGH S
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Rule of consistency; Capital expenditure
• Section: 43B; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH D : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04) ACIT, VS. M/S. SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, 1, KAPOORTHALA COMPLEX, NEW DELHI. ALIGANJ, LUCKNOW. (PAN : AAJFS8722L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI DINESH VERMA AND HARDEEP SINGH, ADVOCATES REVENUE BY : SHRI SHRAVAN GOTRU, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 13.07.2017 DATE OF ORDER : 18.08.2017 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : APPELLANT, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, C ENTRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E REVENUE), BY FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE I MPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.10.2013 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME-TAX, DELHI-I, NEW DELHI, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 2 1. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) IS NET CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.29,34,540/- MADE BY AO EN ACCOUNT OF EXCESSIVE WASTAGE OF NEWSPRINT, 3. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,45,84,380/- MADE BY AO EN ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYER'S AND EMPLOYEES' CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND. 4. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.47,715/- MADE BY AO EN ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYER'S AND EMPLOYEES' CONTRIBUTION E.S.I. 5. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. RS.9,26,458/- MADE BY AO REPRESENTING CONTRIBUTION MADE TO THE GRATUITY FUND. 6. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,695/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF 'REPAIRS TO BUILDING. 7. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.8,55,200/- MADE BY AO EN ACCOUNT OF PRIOR PERIOD INCOME. 8. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,10,78,366/- MADE BY AO OUT OF ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES. ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 3 9. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.8,34,951/- MADE BY AO OUT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES. 10. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.24,590/- MADE BY AO UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENSES. 11. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND ANY/ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSEE FIRM IS INTO THE BUSINESS OF PRINTING AND PUBLICATION OF NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, PRINTING RELATED JOBWORK ADVANCING OF MONEY AND TRADING IN CONSUMABL E PRODUCTS. ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLA IMED EXCESSIVE WASTAGE OF NEWSPRINT AT 7.61% EVERY YEAR AND THE EX CESS WASTAGE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DIVERTED TO OPEN MARKET T O EARN UNACCOUNTED INCOME. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, REGISTRATION OF NEWSPAPER INTIMATED TO AO THAT AS PER NEWSPRINT POLICY REGARDING ALLOCATION OF NEWSPRINT UPTO THE LIMIT IN DICATED BELOW HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO NEWSPAPER AS WASTAGE COMPENSATI ON :- ALL NEWS PAPERS 7% MAGAZINES WITH MULTI-COLOR REQUIREMENTS ADDITIONAL 1% STITCHED MAGAZINES (WITH TRIMMING) ADDITIONAL 3% ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 4 3. HOWEVER, AO CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ZERO WAS TAGE MACHINES ARE AVAILABLE AND BEING USED FOR PRINTING AND AS SUCH INDUSTRY WASTAGE AT 6% OF THE TOTAL CONSUMPTION IS ALLOWED AND REMAINING 1.61% NEWSPRINT CONSUMED I.E. 137 MT FOUN D DIVERTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ITS COST ASSESSED AS RS.29,34,5 40/- AND MADE ADDITION THEREOF. 4. AO FURTHER MADE ADDITION OF RS.1,45,84,380/- ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT F UND ON THE GROUND THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINING R ECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND, THE QUESTION OF CREDITING THE SUM T O THE EMPLOYEES ACCOUNT IN THE RELEVANT FUND DOES NOT ARISE AND TRE ATED THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AN D DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION THEREOF. 5. AO ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS.47,715/- AND RS.9,26 ,458/- ON THE GROUND THAT ESI CONTRIBUTION AND CONTRIBUTION T O THE GRATUITY FUND RESPECTIVELY BY EMPLOYEES AND EMPLOYERS HAVE B EEN MADE BEYOND THE DUE DATES. 6. AO ALSO DISALLOWED THE AMOUNT OF RS.3,695/- CLAI MED AS DEDUCTION BY THE ASSESSEE INCURRED BY ITS NOIDA UNI T OF ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEVER UNDERTAKE N TO BEAR THE COST OF REPAIRS TO THE PREMISES. ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 5 7. AO FURTHER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.8,55,200/- FRO M THE PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN TAXED IN THE PERIOD TO WHICH IT RELATES AND AS SUCH, IT WILL FORM THE TAXABLE INCOME DURING THE YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT. AO FURTHER MADE ADDITION OF RS.5,11,24,476/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSE E AS ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF CRICKET MATCHE S SPONSORED BY THE SAHARA ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT ESTABLISHED ANY DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE BUSINESS/SALES. 8. AO FURTHER MADE ADDITION OF RS.8,34,957/- CLAIME D BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES ON THE GR OUND THAT THE REVISED TELEPHONE BILL RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE. AO FURTHER MADE ADDITION OF RS.2 4,590/- BY DISALLOWING THE DEDUCTION OUT OF BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENSES BY TREATING VARIOUS ITEMS GIFTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TH E NATURE OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. 9. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MARRIED BY WAY OF AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL. FEE LING AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT. 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE S OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 6 ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. GROUND NO.1 11. GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DO NOT REQ UIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. GROUND NO.2 12. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THIS ISS UE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E TRIBUNAL. PERUSAL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, AVAILABLE AT PAGES 128 TO 135 OF THE PAPE R BOOK, RELEVANT PAGE 134, IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 1994-95 APP ARENTLY SHOWS THAT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN TERMINATED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE. ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29.05.2009 HAS BEEN CO NFIRMED BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT BY RETURNING THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS :- 7. HAVING CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF TILE ENTIRE RECORDS, PARTICULARLY, THE ORDERS OF TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING QUANTITATIVE RECORDS OF WASTAGE BUT HE ALLOWED THE WASTAGE @ 7%, WE COULD NOT PERSUADE OURSELVES TO THE REASONING GIVEN BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN RESPECT OF RESTRICTING THE WASTAGE TO 6% OR 7% WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE REASONS OF WASTAGE WERE VARIOUS AND IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES STANDARD OF 7% WASTAGE RATE PRESCRIBED BY REGISTRAR OF NEWSPAPER COULD NOT BE APPLIED. IN FACT, STANDARD OF 7% MAY BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RAISING THE DEMAND OF ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 7 NEWSPRINT, BUT THE AMOUNT OF WASTAGE WOULD DEPEND UPON VARIOUS FACTORS INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF OFFICE, PRINTING UNITS, GODOWNS, ETC. OTHERWISE ALSO IT IS A CLEAR FINDING OF FACT AND WE NOT SEE ANY PERVERSITY OF ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL. 13. FOLLOWING THE DECISION RENDERED BY COORDINATE B ENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL AFFIRMED BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT I N ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2994-95, THERE IS NO ILLEGALITY OR PERVERSITY IN THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY LD. CIT (A), HENCE GROUND NO.1 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUNDS NO.3 & 4 14. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE LD. CIT (A) DECIDED THIS ISSU E IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING HIS OWN ORDER PASSED FOR AY 2001-02, AVAILABLE AT PAGES 46 TO 49 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WHIC H WAS PASSED BY LD. CIT (A) BY RELYING UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY COO RDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2003- 04 IN ITA NO.1568/DEL/2007 DATED 24.10.2008, COPY AVAILABLE A T PAGES 670 TO 680 OF THE PAPER BOOK. 15. PERUSAL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2003-04 APPA RENTLY SHOWS THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS DEALT WITH AND DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY RETURNING THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS :- 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 8 AS PER CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (25) OF SECTION 10, ANY INCOME RECEIVED BY THE TRUSTEES ON BEHALF OF A RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND IS EXEMPT FROM TAX. DEFINITION OF A RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND IS GIVEN IN SECTION 2(38) WHICH READS AS UNDER :- 2 IN THIS ACT, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES, - (38) RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND MEANS A PROVIDENT FUND WHICH HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE RECOGNIZED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES CONTAINED IN PART A OF THE FOURTH SCHEDULE, AND INCLUDES A PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952 (19 OF 1952) 11. A PERUSAL OF THE DEFINITION GIVEN IN SECTION 2(38) AS ABOVE SHOWS THAT A PROVIDENT FUND WHICH HAS BEEN OR CONTINUES TO BE // RECOGNIZED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR THE COMMISSIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES CONTAINED IN PART A OF THE FOURTH SCHEDULE IS SAID TO BE A 'RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND' AS PER THE FIRST LIMB OF THE DEFINITION GIVEN IN SECTION 2(38). FURTHER, AS PER THE SECOND LIMB OF THE DEFINITION, A RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND ALSO INCLUDES A PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952. THE DEFINITION GIVEN IN SECTION 2(38) THUS IS AN INCLUSIVE DEFINITION AND AS PER THE SECOND LIMB OF THE SAID DEFINITION WHICH IS INDEPENDENT OF THE FIRST LIMB, IT INCLUDES A PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHE D UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE HERE THAT THE CONDITION OF RECOGNITION OF THE FUND BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER AS STIPULATED IN THE FIRST LIMB IS CONSCIOUSLY ABSENT IN THE SECOND LIMB WHICH CLEARLY DEPICTS THAT SUCH RECOGNITION IS NOT A CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR A ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 9 PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT. 1952 TO BE A 'RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND' WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(38), WE, THEREFORE, FIND NO MERIT IN THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT SUCH RECOGNITION BY THE CHIEF CIT OR CIT IS REQUIRED EVEN IN CASE OF A PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952. IN OUR OPINION, A READING OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(38) DEFINING 'RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND ESPECIALLY THE SECOND LIMB THEREOF CLEARLY SHOWS THAT A PROVIDENT FUND ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952 HAS TO BE REGARDED AS A RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE SAME HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER OR NOT AS RIGHTLY HELD BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). SINCE THE PROVIDENT FUND OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST IN RESPECT OF OTHER CONCERNS WAS UNDISPUTEDLY ESTABLISHED UNDER A SCHEME FRAMED UNDER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ACT, 1952, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAME WAS A RECOGNIZED PROVIDENT FUND WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(38) EVEN WITHOUT RECOGNITION BY THE CHIEF CIT OR CIT AND ANY INCOME RECEIVED BY THE TRUSTEES ON BEHALF OF THE SAID FUND WAS EXEMPT FROM TAX AS PER CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (25) OF SECTION 10. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.32,84,310 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM PROVIDENT FUND CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OTHER CONCERNS HOLDING THAT THE SAME WAS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(25) AND DISMISS THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 16. THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE CONTRIBUTION MADE BY THE EMPLOYER FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YE AR, WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT PAGES 168 TO 176 OF THE PAPER BOOK, AN D THE ENTIRE ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 10 PAYMENT IS PROVED TO HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH CHEQUE / DEMAND DRAFT AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF TH E NOIDA UNIT. SO, FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE COORDIN ATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2003-04, GROUNDS NO.3 & 4 ARE DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUND NO.5 17. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.9,26,458/- M ADE BY THE AO REPRESENTING CONTRIBUTION MADE TO THE GRATUITY F UND ON THE GROUND THAT THE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED PRIOR TO THE D ATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN U/S 139 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT IS THE SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT ONCE THE AMOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF GRATUITY FUND IS DEPOSITED THOUGH LATE BUT PRIOR TO THE DATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN U/S 139 FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AS PER PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 43B W.E.F. 01.04.2004 OF FINANCE ACT, 2003, THE SAME CANNOT BE DISALLOWED. RELIANCE IN THIS REGARD IS PLACED ON THE DECISION R ENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN ALLIED MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 224 ITR 677(SC) , AVAILABLE AT PAGE 650 OF THE PAPER BOOK. SO, FOLLOWING THE DECI SION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN ALLIED MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED (SUPRA), THE LD. CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE AD DITION. HENCE, GROUND NO.5 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 11 GROUND NO.6 18. LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.3,695/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF REPAIRS TO THE BUILDING ON THE GRO UND THAT THE AGREEMENT DO NOT COVER INSIDE DAY TO DAY REPAIRS. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT (A) BY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER DECISION OF THE RE VENUE FOR AYS 2004-05 AND 2005-06 DELETED THE SAME BY HOLDING THA T THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. SO, KEEPING IN VIEW THE QUANTUM OF EXPENDITURE CLAIMED ON ACCOUNT OF REPAIR OF THE BUILDING AND IN VIEW OF RULE OF CONSISTENCY, WE FIND NO GROUND TO INTERFERE INTO THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY LD. CIT (A). HENCE, GROUND NO.6 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUND NO.7 19. LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.8,55,200 /- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF PRIOR PERIOD INCOME. AGAIN, B Y FOLLOWING THE RULE OF CONSISTENCY, THE SAME PRIOR PERIOD INCO ME WAS ALLOWED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2002-03. EVEN OTHERW ISE, IT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. MOREOVER, WHEN TOTAL EX PENSES OF THE PRIOR PERIOD STOOD ADDED BACK IN THE INCOME AND EXP ENDITURE CLAIMED WERE NET OF PRIOR PERIOD INCOME, THE ADDITI ON THEREOF WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. SO, IN THESE CIRC UMSTANCES, LD. CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION AND FINDIN G NO ILLEGALITY OR ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 12 PERVERSITY IN THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY THE LD. CIT (A), GROUND NO.7 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUND NO.8 20. LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.5,10,78, 366/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES BY F OLLOWING ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN ASSESSEES OWN C ASE FOR AYS 2005-06 AND 1996-97 BY FOLLOWING THE RULE OF CONSIS TENCY. THIS SETTLED POSITION OF RULE OF CONSISTENCY APPLIED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN ASSESSEES CASE QUA ADVERTISEMENT EX PENSES HAS NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. DR. HENCE, WE FIND NO ILLEGALITY OR PERVERSITY IN THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY LD. CIT (A) AND CONSEQUENTLY, GROUND NO.8 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUND NO.9 21. LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.8,34,951 /- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES BY FOLLOWIN G HIS OWN ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2005-06 AND ORD ER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SISTER CONCERN OF THE A SSESSEE, NAMELY, M/S. CHABBI ADVERTISING IN ITA NO.542/DEL/2009 FOR AY 2003-04, AVAILABLE AT PAGES 114 TO 120 OF THE PAPER BOOK. I N THE SAID CASE, THE TRIBUNAL DEALT WITH IDENTICAL ISSUE AND DECIDED THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT JUST BECAUSE THE TELEPHONE IS REGISTERED IN ANOTHER NAME DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS NOT ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 13 USED THE SAME. MOREOVER WHEN REVENUE IS ALLOWING S UCH EXPENSES IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN EARLIER YEARS, THE RULE O F CONSISTENCY IS TO BE FOLLOWED. SO, WE FIND NO ILLEGALITY OR PERVERSI TY IN THE FINDINGS RETURNED BY THE LD. CIT (A) AND CONSEQUENTLY GROUND NO.9 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. GROUND NO.10 22. THE LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.24,5 90/- MADE BY THE AO UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENSES BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS RENDERED BY CIT (A) IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2004-05 WHO HAS PASSED THE SAME BY FOLLOWING THE TR IBUNALS CASE FOR AY 11994-95 IN ITA NO.465/DEL/2001 DATED 29.05. 2009, COPY OF ORDER IS AVAILABLE AT PAGES 128 TO 135 OF THE PA PER BOOK. SO, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT BY FOLLOWING THE RU LE OF CONSISTENCY AND ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL, LD. CIT (A) HAS R IGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.24,590/-, HENCE GROUND NO.10 IS DETERMINED AGAINST THE REVENUE. 23. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 18 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 TS ITA NO.64/DEL./2014 14 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-1, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.