HOLLISTER MEDICAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM: This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi, dated 28.06.2018 against the assessment order dated 09.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3 ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. NON GRANT OF ADDITIONAL CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF ESOP EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO Rs. 51,33,569: 1.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 35 [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)], New Delhi has erred in confirming the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (hereinafter referred to as DCIT), Circle-11(1), New Delhi. 1.2. The learned CIT(A) further erred in holding that additional claim for ESOP related expenses amounting to Rs. 51,33,569/- is not maintainable by relying on decision in appellant's own case for AY 2013-14 without giving an opportunity to the appellant 1.3. The then learned CIT(A) in appellant's case for AY 2013- 14, erred in disallowing the additional claim by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. (229 ITR 383) stating that the power to admit additional claim lies with the ITAT and not with the CIT(A). In doing so the then learned CIT(A) did not give an opportunity to the appellant. 1.4. The appellant company therefore prays Your Honour to direct the learned DCIT to allow ESOP expenditure amounting to Rs. 51,33,569/-. 3. This appeal on ground no.1 is against the addition of Rs.51,33,569/- as additional deduction for ESOP Expenses. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is squarely covered by the order of the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2013-14 in dated 23.03.2021. 4. The ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also gone through the order of the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal brought on record by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and we find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has given a very detailed order on this issue in assessee’s own case for AY 2013-14. After due consideration, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal had remanded back this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of the claim of the assessee and give adequate opportunity to the assessee with direction to pass the order as per provisions of law. Accordingly, we are also inclined to remand it back to the file of the Assessing Officer on this issue to verify the claim of the assessee and decide the issue as per provisions of law. 6. The appeal on ground no.2 is against for not granting of carry forward of MAT Credit. On this issue, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed a brief synopsis, which is reproduced as under:- “It is submitted that the Appellant had reported I MAT credit of INR 30,95,589/- in its Rol. After the allowance of the deduction of ESOP expenses, the MAT credit will be increased to INR 47,61,175/-. The Ld. AO in the computation sheet has not allowed the carry forward of MAT credit, without assigning any reasons for doing so. It is submitted that Ld. CIT(A) himself in AY 2013-14 has allowed carry forward of the MAT credit. Accordingly, it is prayed that directions may be issued to the Ld. AO to allow carry forward of MAT credit INR 47,61,175 of in terms of Section 115JAA(3A) of the Act”.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025. [MAHAVIR SINGH]

[KRINWANT SAHAYA]

VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated 19.11.2025
f{x~{tÜ
f{x~{tÜ
f{x~{tÜ
f{x~{tÜ