Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi V. ACIT CIRCLE-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 9622/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Bharti Telemedia Limited appealing against the order of the CIT (A)-2, New Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was regarding the jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which the assessee argued was incorrectly assumed by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) upheld the jurisdiction but decided in favor of the assessee on the specific issue of activation revenue. The assessee withdrew the appeal after the Revenue Department did not contest the CIT(A)'s decision on the activation revenue, citing a similar precedent from the Supreme Court.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 113666 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2019
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC), ITO vs Techspan India Private Ltd. & Anr. (2018) 404 ITR 101 302 CTR 74 (SC), Pr.CIT vs. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 333 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.9622/Del./2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Bharti Telemedia Limited, vs. ACIT, Circle 4 (2), 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj Phase – II, New Delhi. (PAN : AADCB0147R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Vinay Meena, CA REVENUE BY : Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 31.01.2023 Date of Order : 02.02.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order of ld. CIT (A)-2, New Delhi dated 30.08.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- “1) That the Assessing Officer has erred both on facts and in law in assuming and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 2 ['CIT(A)'] has further erred in confirming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), disregarding the facts that the ingredients for applying the provisions of Section 147 of the Act were missing and thus the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act was incorrect in law and the order passed by the Assessing Officer ITA No.9622/Del./2019 2 under section 147/143(3) of the Act is invalid in law and needs to be quashed. 2) That the Assessing Officer erred on facts and in law in reopening and the CIT(A) further erred in confirming the assessment under section 147 of the Act merely on the change of opinion on the same material facts examined in original assessment wherein no new facts have come to the knowledge of the Assessing Officer. 3) That the Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in disregarding the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and in ITO vs Techspan India Private Ltd. & Anr. (2018) 404 ITR 101 302 CTR 74 (SC). 4) That the Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in not appreciating that a detailed factual and legal submission was submitted by the Appellant before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings on January 31, 2014 wherein the Appellant had made full disclosure. 5) That the Assessing Officer / CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in by not appreciating the fact that there is no revenue loss in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act.” 3. At the outset, in this case, the assessee has filed an application for withdrawal of the appeal which reads as under :- “The above mentioned appeal is fixed for hearing on 31 st January 2023. In this regard, we wish to humbly submit as under: - 1. The CIT(A) has decided the matter related to activation revenue in favour of the Appellant Company on merits. However, the CIT(A), has decided matter against the Appellant Company on jurisdiction of section 147 of Act. 2. We understand that, the Revenue Department has not filed appeal against order passed by the CIT(A) on the issue ITA No.9622/Del./2019 3 related to activation revenue as the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP in the case ofPr.CIT vs. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 333 (SC) on the similar matter. In view of the above, as the issue related to activation revenue has already reached its finality, hence, the Appellant Company is withdrawing captioned appeal.” 4. In the light of the aforesaid application of the assessee to withdraw the appeal, we hereby dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on this 2 nd day of February, 2023. Sd/- sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR US) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 2 nd day of February, 2023 TS Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-2, New Delhi. 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.