AI Insights
The case involves HBA International India Pvt. Ltd., which sought recall/rectification of a Tribunal order concerning an assessment year 2009-10. The original dispute centered on the denial of a deduction claim under section 10B of the Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer, which was later contested and partially resolved by the first appellate authority directing a re-examination under section 10A. The Tribunal initially dismissed the Revenue's appeal considering it a low tax effect case, but upon review, acknowledged the oversight but upheld the first appellate's decision on merits.
Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300514 (ITAT-DELHI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
3 year(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
22-05-2023
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
C
Next Hearing Date
18-05-2023
Assessment Year
2009-2010
Appeal Filed On
23-04-2020
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No.99/Del/2020 [Arising out of ITA No.7239/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi Vs. HBA International India Pvt. Ltd., A-27, First Floor, Mohan Co- operative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi PAN :AABCH2968Q (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned application has been filed by the assessee seeking recall/rectification of the order dated 23.08.2019 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.7239/Del/2017. Applicant by Sh. Virendra Singh, Sr. DR Respondent by Ms. Rano Jain, Advocate Ms. Mansi Jain, CA Date of hearing 19.05.2023 Date of pronouncement 23.05.2023 M.A. No.99/Del/2020 2 | P a g e 2. It has been submitted before us by learned Departmental Representative that, though, the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue in the appeal is more than the threshold limit of Rs.50 lakhs, however, the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal treating it as low tax effect case in terms of CBDT Circular no. 17/2019, dated 8 th August, 2019. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee, though, fairly submitted that the tax effect on the amount disputed by the Revenue is more than Rs. 50 lakhs, however, she submitted that no prejudice is caused to the Revenue with the dismissal of the appeal as the Revenue cannot have a grievance against the decision of learned first appellate authority, as, he has merely directed the Assessing Officer to examine assessee’s claim of deduction under section 10A of the Act, as directed by the Tribunal. 4. Having considered rival submissions, we find that in the return of income filed for the impugned assessment year, the assessee had claimed deduction under section 10B of the Act. In the assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the conditions of section 10B were not satisfied. However, the first appellate authority allowed deduction under section 10A of the Act. Ultimately, the dispute reached the M.A. No.99/Del/2020 3 | P a g e Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the assessee filed cross objection making alternative claim that the deduction is otherwise allowable under section 10A of the Act. While deciding Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection, the Tribunal, in order dated 25.03.2014, restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine whether necessary conditions for availing benefits under section 10A of the Act were fulfilled. However, the Assessing Officer again rejected assessee’s claim without strictly complying with the directions of the Tribunal. 5. Considering the fact that learned Commissioner (Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to examine assessee’s claim under section 10A of the Act in compliance with the direction of the Tribunal, we find no infirmity in the decision of the first appellate Tribunal. Therefore, though, we are of the view that there is a mistake in the order of the Tribunal in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue by wrongly assuming that it is a low tax effect case in terms of CBDT Circular no. 17/2019, dated 8 th August, 2019, however, the appeal has to be dismissed, as, on merits, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the first appellate authority. Accordingly, the appeal order is modified to this extent. M.A. No.99/Del/2020 4 | P a g e 6. In the result, miscellaneous application is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23 rd May, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (G.S. PANNU) (SAKTIJIT DEY) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23 rd May, 2023. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
Mehul