PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA 557/2023

Page 1 of 3

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Date of decision: 27.09.2023

+ ITA 557/2023

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT LTD

..... Appellant

Through: Mr Deepak Chopra, Advocate.

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

..... Respondent Through: Mr Aseem Chawla, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms Pratishtha Chaudhary and Mr Aditya Gupta, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

CM APPLs. 50306-07/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ITA 557/2023 2. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 3. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/assessee seeks to challenge the order dated 12.05.2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short “Tribunal”]. 4. Mr Deepak Chopra, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/assessee, says that there are two issues which arise for consideration in the instant appeal: (i) First, whether an assessment order could have been passed in the Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:05.10.2023 17:53:02 Signature Not Verified

ITA 557/2023

Page 2 of 3

name of Aradhana Foods and Juices Pvt. Ltd., which ceased to exist upon its amalgamation with the appellant/assessee. (ii) Second, whether the Tribunal was right in sustaining the disallowance of expenses claimed at an ad-hoc rate of 2%. 5. In this context, it is pointed out that the Assessing Officer (AO) had ordered a disallowance @ 10%, which was scaled down by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT(A)] to 2%. 6. Since the first issue was not raised before the Tribunal, Mr Chopra says that it would serve the interest of justice if the court were to confine the matter to the second issue and remand the said issue to the AO for examining the underlying material based on which miscellaneous expenses were claimed by the appellant/assessee. 7. According to Mr Chopra, the ad hoc disallowance of miscellaneous expenses, as sustained by the CIT(A), does disservice to the appellant/assessee’s cause as it has in its possession the relevant material, which it was never called upon to produce by the AO. 7.1 Mr Chopra emphasizes that the appellant/assessee had produced the books of accounts and other documents which were sought for by the AO. 7.2 It is stated that since bills and vouchers were not sought for, the same were not produced. 8. We put this aspect to Mr Aseem Chawla, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent/revenue, that if we were to remand the matter to the AO, it would perhaps serve the interest of the appellant/assessee as well as the respondent/revenue. 8.1 Mr Chawla agrees that this may be the best course of action, given the evidence that was produced before the AO. Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:05.10.2023 17:53:02 Signature Not Verified

ITA 557/2023

Page 3 of 3

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 / tr

Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:05.10.2023 17:53:02 Signature Not Verified