Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM
BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM Assessment Year : 2013 – 14 M/s Nova Medical Centers Pvt. Ltd., No. 128, 5th Floor, Golden Towers, Old Airport Road, DCIT, Circle – 2 (3) (1), vs. Behind HDFC Bank, Kodihalli, Bangalore Bangalore – 560017. PAN: AACCN9242N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 09.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 10.01.2020 O R D E R
PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, AM:
This appeal is filed by the revenue and it is directed against the order of CIT(A) – 2 Bengaluru dated 31.10.2018 for A. Y. 2013 – 14.
Only one ground is raised by the revenue as per which the grievance of revenue is about deletion of the addition of Rs. 722,20,450/- made by the A. O. on account of cost of Employees Shares based payments (ESOP) Expenses. 3. In course of hearing, learned DR of the revenue supported the assessment order and he filed written submissions also in which, this is the main argument that learned CIT (A) has followed a tribunal order passed by special bench of the tribunal rendered in the case of Biocon Limited vs. DCIT, 144 ITD 21 but the ITA Nos.3429(B)/2018 Page 2 of 3 department has gone for an appeal before Hon’ble Karnataka High Court against this tribunal order and the issue has not reached finality. Learned AR of the assessee supported the order of CIT (A) and she placed reliance on the following Judicial Pronouncements in addition to the order of the special bench of the tribunal followed by CIT (A) as noted above: - (a) CIT vs. PVP Ventures Ltd., 23 taxman. Com 286 (Madras), (b) Novo Nordisk India Pvt. Ltd. In dated 30.09.2013, (c) DCIT vs. L & T Infrastructure Finance Co. Ltd. In ITA No. 3636/Mum/2017 dated 30.10.2018 4. We have considered rival submissions. We find that learned CIT (A) has followed a decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal and although an appeal is filed by the revenue against this tribunal order before Hon’ble Karnataka High Court but this is not the case of the revenue that operation of this tribunal order is stayed. Hence, this tribunal order is very much in force and is binding on us. We therefore, decline to interfere in the order of CIT (A) and for that, we do not support of any other Judicial Pronouncement.