ITAT Delhi Judgments — December 2023

DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD vs DEEPAK KUMAR, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1494/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1509/DEL/2021[2014-2015]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2014-2015Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD vs DEEPAK KUMAR, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1496/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2015-16Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1527/DEL/2021[2016-2017]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

AJAY KUMAR,MEERUT vs DCIT,CC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 406/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: Heard29 Dec 2023AY 2018-19Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the additional ground, holding that the assessment order was invalid and deemed to have never been issued due to the non-mentioning of DIN. This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd.

LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS INC.,KOLKATA vs ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

ITA 683/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2016-17Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to prove that the assessee made available technical knowledge, know-how, or skills to the service recipient, thus the fees do not qualify as FIS under the DTAA. However, the Tribunal also found that the Assessing Officer did not make any prejudicial variation to the returned income, so a draft assessment order was not required.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs APPLE COMMODITIES LTD, NOIDA

ITA 2242/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the conditions for issuing a notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act were not satisfied. Specifically, there was no incriminating material seized that belonged to the assessee and had a bearing on their income for the relevant assessment years.

DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD vs DEEPAK KUMAR, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1497/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2018-19Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs AJAY KUMAR, MEERUT

ITA 594/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: Heard29 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the additional ground, holding that the assessment order was invalid and deemed to have never been issued due to the non-mentioning of DIN. This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd.

DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD vs DEEPAK KUMAR, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1495/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

AJAY KUMAR,MEERUT vs DCIT,CC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 404/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: Heard29 Dec 2023AY 2016-17Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the additional ground, holding that the assessment order was invalid and deemed to have never been issued due to the non-mentioning of DIN. This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs APPLE COMMODITIES LTD, NOIDA

ITA 2241/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the conditions for issuing a notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act were not satisfied. Specifically, there was no incriminating material seized that belonged to the assessee and had a bearing on their income for the relevant assessment years.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs ROLLAND ENTERPRISES LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3353/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal held that assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note recorded on 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of Section 153C and thus void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment for AY 2012-13 was also treated as void.

AJAY KUMAR,MEERUT vs DCIT,CC, GHAZIABAD

ITA 405/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: Heard29 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the additional ground, holding that the assessment order was invalid and deemed to have never been issued due to the non-mentioning of DIN. This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1507/DEL/2021[2012-2013]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-2013Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs ROLLAND ENTERPRISES LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3348/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2007-08Dismissed

The Tribunal held that assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note recorded on 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of Section 153C and thus void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment for AY 2012-13 was also treated as void.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs GYNIA HOLDING LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3913/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2007-08Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note recorded on 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of Section 153C and therefore void ab initio.

PARMOD KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs ITO WARD 45(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 3104/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12Remanded

The Tribunal found that the AO should have examined the past profit history and declared profits by similarly situated assessees. The orders of the lower authorities were not sustainable.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs APPLE COMMODITIES LTD, NOIDA

ITA 2243/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the conditions for issuing a notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act were not satisfied. Specifically, there was no incriminating material seized that belonged to the assessee and had a bearing on their income for the relevant assessment years.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs AMIT SANKHWAL, NEW DELHI

ITA 1565/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal held that additions made in unabated completed assessments are only sustainable if based on incriminating material found during the search. Since no such material was found linking to the additions, the CIT(Appeals)'s deletion of the additions was upheld.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs GYNIA HOLDING LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3912/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2006-07Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note recorded on 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of Section 153C and therefore void ab initio.

AAPC SINGAPORE PTD. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

ITA 581/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2015-16Allowed

The Tribunal held that the fee received for centralized services cannot be treated as FTS or royalty under the India-Singapore DTAA, but rather as business income. Since the assessee has no Permanent Establishment (PE) in India, this business income is not taxable in India.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs M/S WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3355/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2007-08Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessments made under Section 153C for the relevant assessment years were outside the scope of the section due to the date of the satisfaction note. Consequently, the assessments were deemed void ab initio.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1510/DEL/2021[2015-2016]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2015-2016Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1529/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2018-2019Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1511/DEL/2021[2016-2017]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

TABLEAU INTERNATION UNLIMITED COPMANY THE OVAL SHELBOURNE ROAD OVEL BALLSBRIDGE DUBLIN,IRELAND D04E7K5,IRELAND vs DCIT,CIRCLE3(1)(1) INTERNATIOANAL TAXATION, DELHI

ITA 1875/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2019-20Allowed

The Tribunal held that the DRP's directions were invalid and non-est in law due to the absence of a mandatory DIN, as per CBDT Circular No. 19 of 2019. Consequently, the assessment order passed based on these invalid directions was also deemed unsustainable.

EGIS INTERNATIONAL S.A.S. (EARLIER KNOWN AS EGIS INTERNATIONAL S.A.),NEW DELHI vs ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

ITA 2333/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that for a foreign entity, overdue receivables do not prejudice Indian transfer pricing regulations. Furthermore, if working capital adjustments are made, they ordinarily subsume interest on receivables, negating the need for separate benchmarking.

VAYAS MULTI TRADING PVT LTD, NEW DELHI vs ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

ITA 2295/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular regarding DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication (assessment order) as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs M/S WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3354/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2006-07Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessments made under Section 153C for the relevant assessment years were outside the scope of the section due to the date of the satisfaction note. Consequently, the assessments were deemed void ab initio.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1508/DEL/2021[2013-2014]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2013-2014Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1526/DEL/2021[2015-2016]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2015-2016Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLEII, NOIDA vs APPLE COMMODITIES LTD, NOIDA

ITA 2244/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the conditions for issuing a notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act were not satisfied. Specifically, there was no incriminating material seized that belonged to the assessee and had a bearing on their income for the relevant assessment years.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1528/DEL/2021[2017-2018]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2017-2018Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1525/DEL/2021[2014-2015]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2014-2015Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DEEPAK KUMAR,GHAZIABAD (U.P) vs DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GZBD U.P, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 1512/DEL/2021[2017-2018]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2017-2018Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1524/DEL/2021[2013-2014]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2013-2014Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs SUNIL AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

ITA 1523/DEL/2021[2012-2013]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-2013Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the absence of DIN on the assessment order, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, renders the communication void. It followed the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., stating that Section 292B of the IT Act is not applicable in such cases.

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs AMIT SANKHWAL, NEW DELHI

ITA 1564/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal held that additions made in unabated completed assessments are only sustainable if based on incriminating material found during the search. Since no such material was found linking to the additions, the CIT(Appeals)'s deletion of the additions was upheld.

DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD vs DEEPAK KUMAR, GHAZIABAD

ITA 1493/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Dec 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular mandating DIN is binding on revenue authorities and its non-compliance renders the communication, i.e., the assessment order, as never issued. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed invalid.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs M/S. I SERVICES INVESTMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3130/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2007-08Dismissed

The Tribunal held that assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note dated 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of the section and thus void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment for AY 2012-13 was also treated as void.

DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs BATTERY VENTURES VII (MAURITIUS), MAURITIUS

ITA 1937/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a Mauritius resident, is entitled to the benefits of the India-Mauritius DTAA. As per Article 13(4) of the DTAA, gains from the transfer of shares of Indian companies are taxable only in Mauritius.

GREAT EASTERN ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED,GURUGRAM vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1(3)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1, DELHI

ITA 2446/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2014-15Remanded

The tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal based on an incorrect assumption about the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

BITO-LAGERTECHNIK BITTMANN GMBH,GARMANY vs ACIT CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

ITA 2440/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2020-21Allowed

The Tribunal held that Section 50CA is not applicable as the sale consideration (Rs. 233 per share) was higher than the fair market value determined by Rule 11UAA (Rs. 178.12 per share). Therefore, the revenue authorities erred in substituting the sale consideration.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs M/S. I SERVICES INVESTMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3129/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2006-07Dismissed

The Tribunal held that assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note dated 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of the section and thus void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment for AY 2012-13 was also treated as void.

OLIVER WYMAN LIMITED,GURGAON vs THE DCIT ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX, GURGAON

ITA 3381/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2021-22Allowed

The Tribunal held that the assessment order, not containing the mandatory DIN as required by CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, was invalid and deemed to have never been issued. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs ISERVICES INVESTMENTS LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5397/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal held that assessments made under Section 153C for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08, based on a satisfaction note dated 18.11.2013, were outside the scope of the section and thus void ab initio. Consequently, the assessment for AY 2012-13 was also treated as void.

NEERAJ GARG,GURGAON vs ACIT, INT. TAXATION, GURGAON

ITA 650/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Dec 2023AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer erred in not following the directions of the DRP and erroneously determined the salary income from ESOPs exercised. No addition was called for on this account.

BESTECH INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD

ITA 2059/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed27 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made when no exempt income is earned. It also ruled that depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation is allowable as it is an intangible asset. Finally, it was held that if sufficient interest-free funds are available, advances are presumed to be made from such funds.

BESTECH INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, FARIDABAD

ITA 2058/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Dec 2023AY 2016-17Allowed

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made when no exempt income is earned. It also ruled that depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation is allowable as it is an intangible asset. Finally, it was held that if sufficient interest-free funds are available, advances are presumed to be made from such funds.