Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. The appeal filed by Revenue is against the order dated 08.03.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. CIT(A)'] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] arising out of assessment order dated 27.12.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 16(2), Delhi [hereinafter referred as 'Ld. AO'] under section 143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

-2- ITA No.2230/Del/2024 ACIT vs. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.

-3- ITA No.2230/Del/2024 ACIT vs. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.

A.Y. 2017-18 business loss ignoring the fact that there is no provision in the Act of allowing write off of advances as business loss. Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.15,09,601/- on account of provision for ESOP expenses. Learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,93,33,194/- on account of addition of foreign payment u/s 40(a)(i).

-4- ITA No.2230/Del/2024 ACIT vs. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.

A.Y. 2017-18

7. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that learned CIT(A) in para no. 5.1.6 has observed as under:

"5.1.6 In view of the above, and respectfully following the case laws relied upon by the appellant especially the order of the Hon'ble jurisdictional bench of the ITAT Delhi in the case of appellant for A.Y. 2016-17, it is held that the claim of advances written off is allowable as business loss. Accordingly, the disallowance of Rs.1,27,43,326/- under the head doubtful advances written off is hereby deleted."

-6- ITA No.2230/Del/2024 ACIT vs. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.

A.Y. 2017-18 8.1 Copy of ITAT order, Delhi Benches at pages 106-113 of the paper book has also submitted in the case of Matrix Cellular International Services Ltd. vs. JCIT in ITA No.6916/Del/2019 dated 18.01.2023.

9. From perusal of the findings of learned CIT(A), it is evident that learned CIT(A) has followed the orders of ITAT in assessee's own case for previous years 2015-16 & 2016-17. The findings of learned CIT(A) are well reasoned and cannot faulted. The arguments of learned Authorized Representative for Department of Revenue and grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are tenable. Grounds of appeal are dismissed.