HCL Comnet Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

MA 39/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6213 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

1 M. A No. 39/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” ‘FRIDAY’ BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A NO. 39/Del/2021 In ( I.T.A. No. 1113/DEL/2017 A.Y 2012-13) HCL Comnet Ltd. 806, Sidharth, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi PAN: AAACH9667H vs DCIT Circle-11(1), Room No. 416, C. R. Building, New Delhi APPLICANT RESPONDENT Applicant by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv & Sh. Aditya Vohra, Adv & Sh. Arpit Goyal, CA Respondent by Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement 17.12.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : This Miscellaneous Application by the assessee seeking to recall the order to the extent of adjudicating the Ground No. 2. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had raised various grounds in the appeal. The Tribunal inadvertently did not adjudicate the Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee in respect of addition of Rs. 2,48,71,145/-made by the 2 M. A No. 39/Del/2021 Assessing Officer on account of credit of tax deducted at source on deferred Revenue, without appreciating that it was only cause of timing difference and loss to the Revenue arose on account of said approach followed by the assessee. 3. Ld. DR conceded that the Ground No. 2 of the assessee’ s appeal has not been adjudicated and he has no objection if the order is recalled to the extent of adjudicating the Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee had raised Ground Nos. 2 & 3 before the Tribunal which are reproduced as under:- “2. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs.2,48,71,145 made by the assessing officer on account of credit of tax deducted at source / (“TDS”) on deferred revenue, without appreciating that it was only a case of timing difference and no loss to the Revenue arose on account of said approach followed by the appellant. 3. Without prejudice, that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in disallowing credit of entire amount of TDS amounting to Rs.2,48,71,145 related to deferred revenue and in not allowing credit of TDS on proportionate basis, 3 M. A No. 39/Del/2021 as specified under Rule 37BA (3)(ii) of the Rules." 5. However, the Tribunal decided the issue by observing as under:- “16. So, in view of the undisputed factual position explained by the assessee and following the order passed by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of HCL Comnet Systems and Services Ltd. (supra), we are of the considered view that the TDS credit is to be taken irrespective of the year to which it relates even when a related revenue is booked in subsequent financial year, the assessee is entitled to make claim of the entire TDS in the years of deduction. So, the assessee is entitled for credit for tax deducted at source proportionately across those years in which income is assessable to tax. Consequently, AO is directed to allow credit of TDS on proportionate basis as required under Rule 37BA (3)(ii). So, Grounds No.2 and 2.1 are allowed.” 6. From the above, it is evident that inadvertently error has crept into the order of the Tribunal that needs rectification. We, therefore, recall the order dated 4/9/2020 in ITA No. 1113/Del/2017 for the limited purpose of adjudicating Ground No. 2of the assessee’s appeal. 4 M. A No. 39/Del/2021 7. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated hereinabove. Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 17 th December, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (KUL BHARAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 17/12/2021 JUDICIAL MEMBER *R. N* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI