PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -2 vs. M/S. ACB INDIA PVT. LTD.

$~1 to 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1254/2018, ITA 1255/2018, ITA 1256/2018, ITA 1257/2018, ITA 1258/2018 and ITA 1259/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) -2 Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue Versus M/S. ACB INDIA LTD. Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KIIANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI ORDER % - 27.11.2018 CM No. 46980/2018 in ITAT254/2018 CM No. 46981/2018 in ITA 1255/2018 CM No. 46982/2018 in ITA 1256/2018 CM No. 46983/2018 in ITA 1257/2018 CM No. 46984/2018 in ITA 1258/2018 CM No. 46985/2018 ihlTA 1259/2018 Applications for condonation of delay are allowed as they are not opposed. CM No. 49263/2018 in ITA 1255/2018 CM No. 49277/2018 in ITA 1256/2018 CM No. 49282/2018 in ITA 1257/2018 CM No. 49271/2018 in ITA 1258/2018 CM No. 49292/2018 inlTA 1259/2018 These applications for placing the correct orders passed by the Assessing Officer and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are also allowed. Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:09.10.2024 15:41 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified

ITA Nos. 1255/2018 and 1257/2018 These appeals by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) in the case of ACB India Private Limited relate to the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessing Officer, invoking clause (ii) of Sub-Rule 2 to Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, had made disallowance of Rs. 39,05,855/- under Section 14A of the Act, being one-half per cent of of the average of the total investment of Rs.78,11,71,066/- made by the respondent-assessee as on April, 2010 and on 3 March, 2011. 3. Total exempt income earned by the respondent-assessee during the year in form of dividend income was Rs. 47,950/-. The exempt income of Rs. 47,950/- was less than 0.666% of the appellants total income of Rs.795,12,40,999/-. Further, the amount of disallowance was more than 8000% of the exempt income earned. 4. ' The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had computed the disallowance by taking average of the dividend yielding investment at the beginning and at the end of the Assessment Year 2011-12. On this computation, expenditure of Rs. 1,644/- was disallowed under Section 14A of the Act. 5. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has upheld the first appellate order relying on the Delhi High Court decision in the case of the respondent-assessee for the Assessment year 2008-09 reported as ACB India Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Delhi). 6. In the aforesaid factual background, we are not inclined to issue notice in the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12. They are dismissed without any order as to costs. ITA Nos.1254/2018,1256/2018.1258/2018 and 1259/2018: 7. Facts in respect of the Assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 are

different and reasoning given by the Income Tax Appellate Tril^nal would require consideration in view of the ratio in Maxopp Investment Limited versus Commissioner of Income Tax (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). Accordingly, we direct issue of notice in ITA Nos. 1254/2018, 1256/2018, 1258/2018 and 1259/2018 which relate to the Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice. 9. Re-list on 6^^^ March, 2019. SANJIVKHANNA, J. NOVEMBER 27, 2018 MR ^ ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J