SAVISTA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCLLE-22(2), DELHI

ITA 3347/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Savista Global Solutions Private Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an earlier assessment order. The primary issues under appeal included the denial of MAT credit and the disallowance of a loss claimed on Mark-to-market on foreign exchange losses. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) had not provided a fair opportunity for a personal hearing and had proceeded with bias by not waiting for the resolution of similar issues in earlier assessment years. The tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the pending appeals for AYs 2010-11 & 2011-12, which were crucial for determining the MAT credit for the year under appeal, and that the appellant had not been given a proper opportunity to present details regarding the foreign exchange losses.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470449 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANUJ SABHARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 250; 115JB

Judgement Text

"ITA No.3347/Del/2024 Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3347/Del/2024 [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Savista Global Solutions Private Ltd., K-185/14, First Floor, Surya Plaza, New Friends Colony, South East Delhi, New Delhi-110025. PAN-AABCN9158L vs DCIT, Circle-22(2), Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Manuj Sabharwal, Adv., Shri Devrat Tiwari, Adv. & Shri Drona Negi, Adv. Respondent by Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 03.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 03.02.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The present appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee seeking to assail the First Appellate order dated 22.05.2024 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065082970(1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the order dated 21.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has challenged the appellate order on the following grounds:- 1. “That, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not granting the opportunity of personal hearing in terms of s. 250(1) read with s. 250(2) of the Act, and hence the appellate order is vitiated in law, being against the statutory mandate and also against the principles of natural justice. ITA No.3347/Del/2024 Page | 2 2. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate order without considering the submissions as well as specific request of the Appellant that the pending appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 be adjudicated prior to the present year being AY 2015-16, and thus has proceeded with bias against the Appellant. 3. That, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not categorically deciding the issue of allowability of MAT credit amounting to Rs. 2,00,49,435, which issue could not have been decided without the adjudication of the said issue in preceding years being AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12 already pending before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deciding the issue of mark to market losses on forward exchange contracts in-liminie without appreciating the material already on record and also without granting the effective opportunity of being heard. While doing so, the Id. CIT(A) has also erred in not discussing the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the appellant (which are binding upon him under Article 141 of the Constitution of India) / higher forums in the grounds raised before him, and hence the appellate order is laconic, and vitiated in law. All the aforesaid grounds are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, delete, rescind, forgo, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal either before or during the hearing before the Hon’ble Tribunal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 20.03.2017 declaring total income of INR 12,19,43,770/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed vide order dated 21.12.2017 wherein the loss of INR 14,57,012/- claimed by the assessee on Mark-to-market on the foreign exchange losses was disallowed and added to the total income. Besides ITA No.3347/Del/2024 Page | 3 this, the assessee was not allowed the MAT credit claimed u/s 115JB of the Act. In first appeal, the appeal of the assessee was decided ex-parte for the reason that the assessee has not made representation in the matter. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR for the assessee submits that only one opportunity was provided by the Ld.CIT(A). In response to which, written submission was filed by the assessee on 19.04.2024 wherein it was submitted that major issue under appeal was with regard to denial of MAT credit claimed u/s 115JB of the Act and since the appeals for AYs 2010-11 & 2011-12 wherein the assessee has paid MAT and claimed the MAT credit in the year under appeal were pending before the Ld.CIT(A) therefore, the present appeal be not disposed off till the outcome of appellate order of those years. The relevant submissions of the assessee is reproduced in pages 4 to 5 of the order of the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR for the assessee further submits that as on date also, the appeals for those two assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 are still pending before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, for the year under appeal, amount of MAT credit available is still not ascertainable. With regard to other addition, the Ld.AR for the assessee submits that no proper opportunity was provided him to submit the necessary details of Mark-to-market on the foreign exchange losses claimed therefore, he prayed that the matter may be sent back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) till the disposal of the appeals for other two years. 4. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submit that the Ld.CIT(A) has already directed the AO to allow the MAT credit as per law and since no details were filed with regard to the Mark-to-market on the foreign exchange losses either before the AO ITA No.3347/Del/2024 Page | 4 or before the Ld.CIT(A) thus, the same deserves to be disallowed. The same deserves to be disallowed and he requested for confirmation of order of Ld.CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the order of Ld.CIT(A), we find that the assessee has made specific prayer for not disposing the appeal of the assessee as the appeals for earlier years i.e. AYs 2010-11 & 2011-12 are pending for adjudication and amount of MAT credit claimed in the year under appeal is solely based on the outcome of such orders. However, the Ld.CIT((A) without considering these facts decided the appeal. Looking to the facts that neither the details with regard to the Mark-to-market on the foreign exchange losses were filed before the appellate authorities as proper opportunity was not provided and the eligible amount of MAT credit available to the assessee is subject to outcome of appellate order for AYs 2010-11 & 2011-12, in the interest of justice, the matter is sent back to Ld.CIT(A) with the direction that the present appeal is to be decided only after the appellate orders of AYs 2010-11 & 2011-12 to determine the correct amount of MAT credit available to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file the necessary details of Mark-to-market on the foreign exchange losses claimed so that this issue is also decided by the Ld.CIT(A) on merits. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) JUDICIAL MEMBER *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3347/Del/2024 Page | 5 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "