MODERN SYNTEX(INDIA)LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, JAIPUR

PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM.

These two appeals by the by the assessee pertaining to assessment years

2008-09 and 09-10 are directed against two separate orders of ld. CIT (A)-II, Jaipur

dated 12.2.2014 and 09.07.2014 respectively. Both these appeals are taken up

together and are being disposed off by way of a consolidated order since identical

grounds are raised, for the sake of convenience and brevity. First, we take up the

assessee’s appeal pertaining to assessment year 2008-09. The assessee has raised

the following grounds of appeal :

“ That the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in holding that the amount of remission of loan is taxable in the hands of the appellant and confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 13,37,90,502/- to the income of the assessee. The addition sustained by the learned CIT (Appeals) is illegal, unjustified and excessive.”

picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment under section 143(3) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was framed vide order dated 10th December, 2010. While framing the assessment, the AO made addition

on account of disallowance of remission of liability of Rs. 13,37,90,502/-. Aggrieved

by this, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT (A), who after considering

the submissions and following the decision of Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for

earlier years confirmed the addition. Now the assessee is in further appeal before

this Tribunal.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is

covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of

assessee. He submitted that the issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional

High Court in favour of the assessee.

On the contrary, the ld. D/R supported the orders of the authorities below.

We have heard rival contentions, perused the material on record and gone

through the orders of the authorities below. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in

DB IT Appeal No. 147/2010 in the assessee’s own case had framed the following

question of law :-

“ Whether the remission of principal amount of loan obtained from financial institutions and banks, constitutes a benefit or perquisite arising from business and would fall within the ambit of Section 28(iv) of the Act ?”

The Hon’ble High Court after considering the submissions of the assessee, answered

the question against the revenue. Therefore, respectfully following the order of the

Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case in DBIT Appeal No.

147/2010 Modern Syntex (India) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, we

hereby direct the AO to delete the disallowance. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Now, we take up the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2009-

herein above. Since identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee,

therefore, following the same, we direct the AO to delete the disallowance. The

appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 26.09.2017.

Sd/- Sd/- ( HkkxpUn ½ ( dqy Hkkjr) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Jaipur Dated:- 26/09/2017. Das/

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत