Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Azalea Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., ... on 28 January, 2021
7. The learned authorised representative submitted that the issue is squarely
covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High
Court in case of Sri Chand Ratan Bagri 329 ITR 356, the decision of the
coordinate bench in case of CIT versus Pavitra Commercial Limited ITA
number 782/D/2015 dated 14/10/2015, 108 taxmann.com 455 principal
Commissioner of income tax versus Kanyalala M Sheth , 312 ITR 63 DCIT
versus BPL Sanyo finance Ltd and Dynamic Foundations Private Limited
versus CIT 232 taxmann 501. He further stated that the issue is also squarely
Page | 6
covered by the several decisions of the coordinate benches. It was further
stated that there is no tax evasion in this case as suggested by the learned
assessing officer, as the aforesaid loss has not been set-off against any income
of the assessee in subsequent years. For this proposition, he submitted the copy
of the return of income for assessment year 2013 - 14 to 2019 - 20 and stated
that now the issue is only academic as far as the assessee is concerned. He
further referred to the written submission placed before the learned CIT - A
which is part of the paper book submitted by him at page number 81 - 89 and
92 - 93 of the paper book. He also referred to the page number 111 and 114 of
the paper book stating the share price of M/s Indiabulls Power Ltd for the
month of October 2010 - may 2012 to show that it was not beneficial for the
assessee to invest further in that particular company and therefore it was
beneficial for the assessee to surrender and allowed to be forfeited the above
sum of ₹ 108.75 crores.