ACIT, New Delhi v. M/s. National Travel Services, New Delhi

ITA 4490/DEL/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 449020114 RSA 2009
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4490/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. National Travel Services, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 29-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 27-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 27-01-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 26-11-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.4490/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX M/S. NATIONAL TRAVEL SERVICES CIRCLE 24(1) NEW DELHI. VS. JETAIR HOUSE 1 3 COMMUNITY CENTRE YUSUF SARAI NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI H.K. LAL SR. DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRATAP GUPTA CA. O R D E R PER B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XXIII NEW DEL HI DATED 09.09.2009 IN AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT FRAM ED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT (THE ACT). 2. IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN THE PRESENT CASE A DEFECTIVE MEMO DATED 26.11.2009 WAS ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT WHERE THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENT WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS M/S. SOPHISTICA TED MARBLES & GRANITE 2 INDUSTRIES 42 SAINIK FARMS NEW DELHI. THE SAME DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED BY THE APPELLANT. DURING THE COURSE OF HEA RING THE LEARNED DR SHRI H.K. LAL HAS CONCEDED TO THE DEFECT IN THE MEMORAND UM OF APPEAL IN FORM 36 WHERE THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENT HAS WRONGLY BEE N MENTIONED AS M/S. SOPHISTICATED MARBLES & GRANITE INDUSTRIES WHICH SH OULD HAVE BEEN AS UNDER:- M/S. NATIONAL TRAVEL SERVICES JETAIR HOUSE 13 COMMUNITY CENTRE YUSUF SARAI NEW DELHI. THE REMOVAL OF DEFECT IS TAKEN ON RECORD. 3. GROUND NO.1 & 2 ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER BEIN G THE ISSUE IDENTICAL AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN DELETIN G THE ADDITION OF RS.36 56 000/- MADE BY THE AO BY INVOKI NG PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN NOT APP RECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HOLDING 48.18% OF THE VOT ING POWER OF M/S. JETAIR PVT. LTD. THE COMPANY WHICH ADVANCED L OAN TO THE ASSESSEE OUT OF THE ACCUMULATED PROFITS. 4. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS.36 56 000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT DELETED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN TREATED AS DEEMED DIVIDEN D UNDER SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 3 5. AT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE SHRI PRATAP GUPTA AS WELL AS THE LEARNED DR SHRI H.K. LAL SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS ON IDENTICAL FACTS IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WHICH HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.109/DEL/2009 4162/DEL/2006 & 3559/DEL/2007 FOR ASSTT. YEARS 2005-06 2003-04 AND 2004-05 RESPECTIV ELY WHERE THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. IN ITA NOS.4162/DEL/2006 & 3559/DEL/2007 FOR THE ASSTT. YE ARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05 ITAT DELHI BENCH `F HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE VIDE PARA 24 & 25 OF THEIR ORDER WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 24. IN THE LIGHT OF THE DISCUSSIONS MADE ABOVE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENC H IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. BHAUMIK COLOUR PVT. LTD. WE ARE INCLIN ED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S 2(22 )(E) OF THE ACT. 25. SIMILARLY IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE O RDER OF LD CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN TREATING THE SAME AS DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S 2(22) (E) ON IDENTICAL FACTS IS UPHELD. IT IS PERTINENT TO KNOW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2004-05 BY FOLLOWING HIS DECISION FOR THE YEAR 2003-04. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. IN VIEW OF THE MATTER SINCE THE FACTS AND ISSUE INV OLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE CITED SUPRA DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES AND FOLLOWING THE SAID ORDERS OF THE 4 CO-ORDINATE BENCH WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDE R OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). THUS GROUND NOS.1 & 2 OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JANUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29 TH JANUARY 2010. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT.