2019 (6) TMI 37 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal cancels additions for non-refundable Advance Fee based on law & res judicata

CL EDUCATE LIMITED Versus DCIT, CIRCLE-3 (1), NEW DELHI

The Tribunal allowed both appeals, deleting the additions made on account of the non-refundable portion of Advance Fee for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13. The ... Income/ Revenue Recognition - Addition on account of Non-refundable portion of Advance Fee - Year of assessment - Income already been offered by the Appellant for taxation in the subsequent assessment year i.e. AY 2012-13 on account of recognition of the amount by the Appellant as income in that year and the department also has accepted it as income in assessment in AY 2012- 13 - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee's own case [2015 (5) TMI 469 - ITAT DELHI] The issue has been fully considered on similarity facts in 2006-07 assessment year wherein the ITAT considering the same Revenue recognition policy of the assessee allowed the claim of the assessee. The said view on facts has consistently been followed by the ITAT in 2007-08; 2008-09; and 2009-10 assessment years wherein either assessee’s appeal has been allowed and where the CIT(A) allowed the relief following the view taken by the ITAT and the department has come in appeal, the departmental appeal has been dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:1. Addition of Non-refundable portion of Advance Fee for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13.2. Application of the principle of res judicata in Income Tax Proceedings.Analysis:Issue 1: Addition of Non-refundable portion of Advance FeeThe appeals were filed against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2011-12 & 2012-13 regarding the addition of non-refundable portion of Advance Fee. The appellant contested the additions on the grounds that they were contrary to facts and law. The appellant argued that the same amount had already been offered for taxation in subsequent assessment years. The appellant relied on consistent policies followed since 1995 and previous judicial rulings in their favor. The Tribunal reviewed the orders of the revenue authorities and a previous decision in the assessee's own case. The Tribunal found that the issue had been consistently decided in favor of the assessee in previous years. Citing the precedent, the Tribunal allowed the appeals and deleted the additions.Issue 2: Application of the principle of res judicataThe appellant contended that the principle of res judicata should apply in Income Tax Proceedings based on a judicial ruling by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The appellant argued that the department cannot reverse its position on a consistent policy followed by the assessee and accepted by the department. The appellant highlighted that previous judicial rulings in their favor were not considered by the authorities. The Tribunal, after examining the precedent and the facts of the case, concluded that the issues in dispute were squarely covered by the previous findings in the assessee's own case. Therefore, the Tribunal applied the principle of res judicata and allowed the appeals in favor of the assessee.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed both appeals, deleting the additions made on account of the non-refundable portion of Advance Fee for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13. The Tribunal's decision was based on the consistent application of the law and the principle of res judicata in Income Tax Proceedings.