IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI

     BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER,
          AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER.

                      SA Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2015
            (Arising out of I.T.A. Nos.2810 & 2350/Mum/2015)

               (Assessment Years: 2009-2010 & 2010-2011)

Capita India Private Ltd,            Asst. Commissioner Of
Plant 6, Godrej & Boyce Complex,     Income- Tax-9(2)(1),
                                 /
Pirojshahnagar, L.B.S. Marg,         Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg,
Vikhroli West,                   Vs. Mumbai-400 020.
Mumbai 400 079.
     . /  . /PAN/GIR No. AABCE 7046A
        ( /Appellant)                     :           (    / Respondent)

         / Appellant by                   :    Shri Nitesh Joshi

          /Respondent by                  :    Shri B.D. Naik


                        /                 :    13/11/2015
                 Date of Hearing
                     /
                                          :    19/11/2015
          Date of Pronouncement

                                 / O R D E R
PER R.C. SHARMA, A. M:

2.     These stay application arise out of ITA No. 2810/Mum/2015 and ITA No.
2350/Mum/2015 filed by the assessee respectfully for the Assessment Years 2009-10
and 2010-11. Through these stay applications, the assessee has sought for stay of
demand of Rs.6.85 crores in the assessment year 2010-11 and Rs. 14.40 crores in the
assessment year 2009-10.






                                             2
                                 SA Nos . 296 & 297/Mum/2015 (A.Ys. 09-10 & 10-2011)
                                                       Capita India Private Ltd vs. Asst. CIT

3.    Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that
the assessee is engaged in providing Information Technology (IT) enabled services to
the Capita group. It has undertakings claiming tax holiday benefits under Section 10A
of the Act at Andheri, Thane, Vikhroli and Pune. While computing taxable income,
the assessee had added the amount of goodwill written off to the total income of the
Bangalore and Pune unit. Deduction under Section 10 A of the Act was claimed in
respect of income of the Bangalore and Pune unit. Since the Goodwill was created on
acquisition of Pune and Bangalore units, the assessee had duly added the amount of
goodwill written off to the total income of Pune and Bangalore units. The amount of
goodwill written off has been added to the total income as unexplained expenditure
under Section 69 C of the Act.


4.    We found that assessee has written off the goodwill in its Profit and Loss
account in compliance with mandatory Accounting Standard. This goodwill had
arisen pursuant to purchase of the Pune and Bangalore units of by the assessee. Thus,
the transaction has been undertaken with an unrelated third party. Further, payment
for the same has been made out of the bank account of the assessee. The acquisition of
goodwill and its subsequent write off had been recorded by the assessee in its books
of account. All the details pertaining to this acquisition and the subsequent write off of
goodwill were disclosed by the assessee in its financial statements. Under these
circumstances it was claimed by Ld. Authorized Representative that there is no reason
to treat the same as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. He further contends
that assessee has already paid 50% of the total demand. We have considered rival
contentions, without going into merit of the case and keeping into view totality of all
the facts and circumstances vis-a-vis the facts that assessee has already paid 50% of
the demand, we grant stay for six months or till date of passing of order whichever is
earlier. The appeal is fixed for hearing on 06-01-2016. The date was announced in the
open court.






                                            3
                                SA Nos . 296 & 297/Mum/2015 (A.Ys. 09-10 & 10-2011)
                                                      Capita India Private Ltd vs. Asst. CIT

In the result, both the stay applications are allowed in terms indicated above.


             Order pronounced in the open court on November 19th, 2015


                   Sd/-                                   Sd/-
      (Shailendra Kumar Yadav)                       (R.C.Sharma)
         / Judicial Member                             / Accountant Member


 Mumbai;  Dated : 19.11.2015
Ashwini Gajakosh

        /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.      / The Respondent
3.     () / The CIT(A)
4.      / CIT - concerned
5.                 ,     ,   / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6.     / Guard File
                                                     / BY ORDER,



                                           /  (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
                                  ,   / ITAT, Mumbai