TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7/2023 passed u/s 250 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short 'NFAC/CIT(A)'] anent to assessment year 2017-18 [in short 'AY'] which in turn arisen out of order of assessment dt. 29/09/2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by learned Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Pune [in short 'AO']. The assessee also preferred a cross objection against the appeal of the Revenue. 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; 2.1 The assessee company is a part of the Enterprise DB Group and is a subsidiary of Enterprise DB International Holdings Inc. [in short 'EDB Crop./AE'] which was engaged in providing product development support services, general and administration support services and sales support services to its gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A(1) of the Act, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) overturned the disallowance. 2.4 Aggrieved by the aforestated adjudication the Revenue impugned the reversal of disallowance on following two grounds; 1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act without considering the facts as per Explanation 1 to subsection 1 of section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of assessee without considering the judgement the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Standard Triumph Motor Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1(1), Pune ('DCIT') erred in objecting to the order of learned CIT(A). General 4. The learned DCIT failed to appreciate that the learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the additions/disallowances of INR 3,70,20,962 made to the returned income of the Respondent. Applicability of Explanation 1 to sub-section 1 of section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') 5. The learned DCIT erred in objecting to the order of the learned CIT(A) without considering the fact that the learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the additions made by the learned DCIT based on the use of the words 'payment of any kind received as consideration' as per Article 12....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the Respondent with respect to the levying of interest under section 234B of the Act on the demand raised by the learned DCIT. 11. The learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating on the ground raised by the Respondent with respect to the wrongful initiation of the penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act by the learned DCIT. 3. During the course of hearing, both the parties to the dispute commonly submitted that, the Ld. NFAC overturned the disallowance without giving its independent findings over the subject matter of adjudication. Adverting to para 2 (placed at Pg2/25) of the impugned order the Ld. AR submitted that, the assessee raised as many as ten grounds, however the appellate proceedings came culminated adjudic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tled legal position. 6. We observed that, while adjudicating the issue in favour of the respondent assessee, the impugned adjudication in relation to each of the ground (1 to 10) raised by assessee did fail to (i) identify the issue under challenge, (ii) conduct necessary enquiries, (iii) give independent findings thereon and (iv) substantiate the decision with valid reasons. 7. We are heedful to the restriction placed by clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 251 of the Act which obligates the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue either by confirming or annulling the addition or reducing or enhancing the addition made by the assessing officer without the right to remand the matter back. However, while exercising the jurisdiction u/s ....