Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Essel Shyam Communication Ltd., New ... vs Assessee on 4 January, 2016
1 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: 'B' NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A .No.-254/DEL/2013
(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08)
Essel Shyam Communication Ltd. vs ACIT
C-138, Central Circle-2
Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-1 New Delhi
New Delhi
AAACE2299Q (RESPONDENT)
(APPELLANT)
Appellant by Sh. Ved Jain, CA, Sh.
Pranjal
Respondent by Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR,
Srivastava, Adv
Date of Hearing 10.12.2015
Date of Pronouncement
04.01.2016
ORDER
PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 30/11/2012 by Ld. CIT (A), III, New Delhi.
2. The grounds of appeal are as follows:-
"1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax [(CITA)] is bad both in the eye of law and on facts.2 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts as the same has been passed without giving assesse an opportunity of being heard.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to the set aside as the non-appearance was by reason beyond the control of the assessee.
4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the A.O in restricting deduction u/s 80IA to Rs.7,82,58,603/- as against Rs.11,56,22,645/- claimed by the assessee.
5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the A.O in excluding an amount of Rs.3,62,19,389/- on account of profit from trading activities while computing deduction u/s 80IA of the Act.
6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the A.O in excluding the gross amount of interest without excluding the proportionate expenses incurred towards earning such interest income while computing income eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act.
7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming a disallowance of Rs.9,79,917/- made by the A.O invoking the provision of Rule 8D u/s 14A of the Act.
2. The assessee company as in the past is engaged in the business of providing Satellite based telecommunication solutions including VSAT services, unlinking services, play out services and broadband services through the satellite. The assessee has shown 3 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013 income from Sales, service income besides from other sources. Gross total income after adjustment in computation of income has been shown at Rs.11,56,22,645/-. Against this, assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IA (4) (ii) of I. T. Act amounting to Rs. 11,56,22,645/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed the said deduction on the ground that the same for the Assessment Year 2006-07 the Assessing Officer has held that assessee is not entitled to deduction on trading activities and interest income etc. and CIT(A) confirmed the said view.
3. The CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without hearing to the assessee or its representative.
4. The Ld. AR submitted that as per Assessee's paper book at page 147, 148, the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2006-07 directed the Assessing Officer to include the receipt representing income from sale of equipment in the eligible receipt for grant of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act and allowed the deduction on the ground that ITAT in the AY 2005-06 has allowed the same.
5. The Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the Assessing Officer and CIT(A).4 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013
6. We have heard both the parties and gone through the orders of CIT (A) as well as the assessment order and come to the conclusion that the factual position was not correctly set out by the CIT(A) and Assessing Officer. The matter is remanded back to the CIT (A) for taking the correct position of the factual aspect and deciding the same after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
7. In result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 4th of January 2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
( S. V. MEHROTRA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 04/01/2016
*R. Naheed*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
5 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013
Date
1. Draft dictated on 10.12.2015 PS
2. Draft placed before author 11.12.2015 PS
3. Draft proposed & placed before .12.2015 JM/AM
the second member
4. Draft discussed/approved by .12.2015 JM/AM
Second Member.
5. Approved Draft comes to the PS/PS
Sr.PS/PS 04.01.2016
6. Kept for pronouncement on .01.2016 PS
7. File sent to the Bench Clerk PS
05.01.2016
8. Date on which file goes to the AR
9. Date on which file goes to the
Head Clerk.
10. Date of dispatch of Order.
6 ITA NO. 254/DEL/2013