M/s. TE Connectivity India Private Limited (Successor in interest to Tyco Electronics Systems India Private Limited), Bangalore V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals -14, LTU, Bangalore

ITA 720/BANG/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1594 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income; Additional evidence; TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

ITA No.720/Bang/2021 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Shri GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.720/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd. “TE Park” 22B, Doddenakundi 2 nd Phase, Industrial Area, Whitefield Road, Bangalore 560 048 PAN NO : AABCT3357R Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1 Bangalore APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sumeet Khurana, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R. Date of Hearing : 19.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.06.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assessee is directed against order of CIT(A) dated 28.4.2017. There was a delay of 1640 days in filing the appeal. There was a delay about 1008 days, which is non-Covid period i.e. pre-Covid period and thereafter there was a delay aboutf 632 days during Covid period and the assessee prayed that the delay was due to non-availability of its personnel in charge of the tax matters, change in personnel of the tax consultants and Covid pandemic. ITA No.720/Bang/2021 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 2 of 5 2. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find that there is a good and sufficient reason in filing the appeal by a delay of 1640 days. There is 1008 days delay before covid period and 632 days after Covid period i.e. March, 2020. The assessee explained the delay by way of condonation petition. We have gone through it. We find that there is good and sufficient reason to file this appeal belatedly before us. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “The grounds mentioned herein are without prejudice to one another. General Ground 1 . The order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) — 14, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, we raise the following grounds: Upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs 1,05,101 and contract receipts of Rs 13.119 887 based on Form 26AS. 2. The Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs 105.101 and contract receipts of Rs 13.119.887 on the basis of Form 26AS. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the Company did not have any business income during the year due to transfer of its Energy Trade and Export business vide business transfer agreement dated September 23. 2010 with Raychem RPG Private Limited (`RRI.; or 'the purchaser') on a going concern basis and the sale was with effect from September 23. 2010. 4. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact the Company had agreed to provide transitional services for and on behalf of RRL during the transition period as per the Business Transfer Agreement and the revenue (if any) pertains to RRL and might have erroneously been reflected in Form 26AS of the Company 5. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact no such receipts are reflected in the bank statement of the Company for the relevant year under consideration 6. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that post effective date of scheme of amalgamation. all the profit or revenues earned in relation to the transferred business is taxable ITA No.720/Bang/2021 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 5 in the hands of RRL and not in the hands of the Company being the seller Non grant of set-off of carry forward loss of INR 49.83.810 of AY 2012-13 7. The Learned AO erred in not granting the set-off of the carried forwar d loss of INR pertaining to AY 2012-13 under the provisions of the Act Levy of consequential interest u/s 2348 of the Act 8. The Learned AO erred in levying and computing consequential interest of INR 19.01,754 under section 234B of the Act. 4. The Assessee also filed additional evidence, which is confirmation letter from Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd. where they confirmed as follows:- 9. “We enclose the confirmation from Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd., as additional evidence for your Honours’ kind consideration along with detailed reasons as to why the said additional evidence should be admitted, supported by the relevant case laws. These documents have a significant bearing on the appeal before your Honours and are relevant for the disposal of this appeal.” 5. Admission of additional evidence under Rule 29. The assessee filed additional evidence and also application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules. After considering the petition, in our opinion, there is good and sufficient reason in adducing additional evidence before us. Accordingly, the additional evidence is admitted for adjudication. 6. First ground is with regard to the upward adjustment on account of professional charges of Rs.1,05,101/- and contract receipts of Rs.1,31,19,887/- based on Form 26AS. the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the AO made an upward adjustment on account of ITA No.720/Bang/2021 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 4 of 5 professional charges of Rs.1,05,101/- and contract receipts of Rs.1,31,19,887/- u/s 41(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] relying on the figures available in Form 26AS. The assessee submitted that it did not have any business income during the year due to the transfer of its business through agreements dated 23.9.2010 with Raychen RPG Private Limited for the sale of energy trade and export business on going concern basis. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the A.O. had taken certain receipts as income based on reconciliation with Form 26AS statement and the corresponding TDS credit also has been given. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. Now the contention of the assessee is that there is no income as reflected in Form 26AS statement. Some people used the assessee’s PAN wrongly and there is no income and there is no question of giving corresponding TDS credit. In our opinion, this is required to be examined after verifying with the person who remitted the TDS. Accordingly, we direct the AO to verify the issue in accordance with law with the person who has issued the TDS certificate in the name of the assessee. At the same time, we shall consider the additional evidence filed before us and decide the issue in accordance with law. The issue is remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration. 8. Other grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee are not pressed before us and hence the grounds are dismissed as not pressed. ITA No.720/Bang/2021 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 5 of 5 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 1 st June, 2022 Bangalore, Dated 1 st June, 2022. VG/SPS Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. Sd/- (George George K. ) Judicial Member Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) Accountant Member