DCIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi vs. Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi
The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 4271/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-13(2), 309, Vikas Deep Building, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, District Centre, Delhi. – 110 092. Pan: Aaacj3260C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Anand, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Parul Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 08.03.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No. Del/Cit(A)-5/0368/2016-17 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Dcit, Circle-13(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao). 2. Heard & Perused The Record. The Ld. Dr Submitted That The Order Of The Cit(A) Is Erroneous As Without Examining The Use Of Subsidy Amount Reliance Was Placed On The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court In The Case Of Shri Balaji Alloys & Others, 333 Itr 335 (J&K). It Was Submitted That The Cit(A) Was Supposed To Examine The Question Of Utilization Of The Subsidy In The Light Of The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Limited, 306 Itr 392 (Sc). The Ld. Ar, However, Relied The Order Of The Cit(A) & Submitted That The Cit(A) Has Not Taken Into Consideration The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Sahney Steel & Press Works Limited Vs. Cit (1997) 228 Itr 253 (Sc).
For Appellant: Shri C.S. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A
…rd and perused the record. The ld. DR submitted that the order of the CIT(A) is erroneous as without examining the use of subsidy amount reliance was placed on the judgement of the Hon’ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court in the case of Shri Balaji Alloys & Others, 333 ITR 335 (J&K). It was submitted that the CIT(A) was supposed to examine the question of utilization of the subsidy in the light of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Limited, 306 ITR 392 (SC). The ld. AR, however, relied the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that the CIT(A) has not taken into consideration…
