Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle -2(1), Pune V. M/s. Emcure Pharmaceutials Ltd, Pune

ITA 969/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9905 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 968 and 969/PUN/2018 नधा रण वष / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle-2(1), Pune Vs. M/s. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Emcure House, T-184, MIDC, Bhosari, Pune – 411 026 PAN : AAACE4574C Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These two appeals by the Revenue relating to the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 emanate from the common order dated 28.02.2018 passed by the ld. CIT(A). Since the issues raised in these appeals are identical, we are, therefore, proceedings to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The grievance of the Revenue is against the direction of the ld. CIT(A) to allow credit for Foreign Tax after Assessee by Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue by Shri Mohit Jain Date of hearing 19-01-2022 Date of pronouncement 20-01-2022 ITA Nos. 968 & 969/PUN/2018 M/s. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.., 2 verification of the claim in contravention to section 251(1) of the Act. 3. Tersely stated, the factual position for the assessment year 2011-12 is that the assessee gave certain unsecured loans to its subsidiary company, namely, Emcure Pharmaceuticals, USA Inc. The Foreign company deducted tax at source on the amount of interest on loan credited to the assessee, which was eventually paid in a later year. The assessee offered interest income in its return of income and also claimed credit for TDS. The AO, in the order passed u/s.143(3), did not allow credit for the TDS. Thereafter, the assessee filed rectification application u/s.154, inter alia, requiring the AO to grant credit for such TDS. The AO in the instant proceedings arising, out of application u/s.154, did not accept the contention of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A), however, allowed the assessee’s claim. Aggrieved thereby, the Revenue has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the rival sides in Virtual court and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen that the AO, in his order u/s.143(3), did not accept the assessee’s claim for allowing credit for the TDS against the interest income for the ITA Nos. 968 & 969/PUN/2018 M/s. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.., 3 year under consideration, which was offered by the assessee in this year itself. The assessee assailed this issue in the second appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 27-08-2019, the Tribunal, relying on certain decisions, accepted the assessee’s claim of granting tax credit in respect of the interest income that was shown by the assessee in the year under consideration. In view of the fact that the Tribunal accepted the assessee’s contention in the proceedings arising out of the order passed u/s.143(3), the instant appeal on the very same issue, flowing from the order passed u/s.154, has virtually become infructuous. Respectfully following the order passed by the Tribunal for the same year allowing Foreign Tax credit in respect of interest income offered during the year under consideration, we uphold the impugned order on this score. 5. The facts for the assessment year 2012-13 are admittedly mutatis mutandis similar to the immediately preceding year. For this year also, the AO did not allow credit for Tax credit on interest income credited by the foreign entity. The assessee moved application u/s.154 and the instant proceedings arose out of such application. The assessee assailed the order u/s.143(3) before the higher authorities. The Tribunal ITA Nos. 968 & 969/PUN/2018 M/s. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.., 4 accepted the assessee’s contention and the ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order has followed the view point of the Tribunal in allowing the assessee’s claim. Since the facts and circumstances of the instant appeal are similar to those for the assessment year 2011-12, following the view taken hereinabove, we uphold the impugned order. 6. In the result, both the appeals are dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20 th January, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 20 th January, 2022 Satish आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/ Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. 4. The CIT(A)-12, Pune The Pr.CIT (Central), Pune 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “A” / DR ‘A’, ITAT, Pune 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune ITA Nos. 968 & 969/PUN/2018 M/s. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.., 5 Date 1. Draft dictated on 19-01-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 19-01-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *