ACIT, Circle-12(1), New Delhi. Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd., Suite No.304, 3rd Floor, DLF South Court, New Delhi.
October, 07th 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Assessment Year : 2010-11
ACIT, Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd.,
Circle-12(1), Suite No.304, 3rd Floor,
New Delhi. DLF South Court,
Appellant by : Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA
Respondent by: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR
Date of Hearing : 01.10.2015
Date of Pronouncement: 06.10.2015
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by
the CIT(A) on 30.5.2014 in relation to the Assessment Year 2010-11.
2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the deletion of
addition of Rs.1,55,71,643/-
ITA No.4509/Del/2014 2
3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee declared
revenue receipts of Rs.8,74,667/-. As against that, the assessee claimed
deduction for expenses amounting to Rs.1,55,71,643/-. The AO opined
that the business of the assessee was not set up and, hence, no deduction
could be allowed. He, therefore, made disallowance of Rs.1.55 Crore.
The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. The Revenue is aggrieved against
the deletion of the addition.
4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant
material on record. It is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the
addition by relying on the Tribunal order passed in the assessee's own
case for earlier years deciding the issue in the assessee's favour. The ld.
AR invited my attention towards a copy of the judgment rendered by the
Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case for the AYs 2007-
08 and 2008-09 in which a categorical finding has been recorded that
the business was set up and had commenced. It has further been noticed
by the Hon'ble High Court that the assessee was required to incur
expenses for the business in the form of investment in shares of cement
companies. That is how the deduction was allowed. In view of the fact
that the Hon'ble High Court has, in identical circumstances, for
ITA No.4509/Del/2014 3
assessment years 2007-08 and 200-09, allowed deduction for such
expenses, respectfully following the precedent, I also order for the
deduction of expenses because no distinguishing facts for the year under
consideration vis-à-vis those considered and examined by the Hon'ble
High Court, have been brought to my notice by the ld. DR. I, therefore,
uphold the impugned order.
5. In the result, the appeal filed is dismissed.
The decision was pronounced in the open court on 06th October,
Dated:06th October, 2015.
Copy forwarded to
Dy. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi