Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 145 - AT - Income TaxIncome recognition - year of taxability - Addition of advisor’s fees received from India Value Investment Ltd. (INVIL) - there was uncertainty with regard to receipt of investment advisory fee due to dispute between the parties, as per AS –9, assessee recognized the revenue when the dispute was settled and the assessee received the amount - CIT(A) deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has received rupee equivalent of GBP 12,14,022 in the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2010–11 and has also offered it for taxation in the said assessment year. It is also a fact on record that the said income has been assessed at the hands of the assessee in the assessment year 2010–11 vide assessment order passed u/s 143(3) on 10th January 2013. Since, the income actually accruing to the assessee has been assessed in the assessment year in which it was received, it cannot be taxed again in the impugned assessment year as it will amount to double assessment of the same income. Therefore, in these circumstances, since the income has been assessed in assessment year 2010–11, there is no need to tax it in the impugned assessment year as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Excel Industries Ltd. [2013 (10) TMI 324 - SUPREME COURT] Therefore, we do not find any need to interfere with the decision of learned CIT(A) on the issue. Violation of rule–46A - HELD THAT:- This issue was raised for the first time by learned CIT(A) during the appeal proceeding before him. While restoring the issue back to the file of the learned CIT(A), the Tribunal had given specific direction to verify the actual amount of investment advisory fee received by the assessee from INVIL on settlement of dispute and further, to examine the assessment year in which the said income is taxable. From the impugned order of learned CIT(A) it is evident, she has fully complied with the directions of the Tribunal by factually verifying the amount received by the assessee from INVIL on settlement of dispute and further, on the basis of material on record she has also formed an opinion with regard to the assessment year in which the income is taxable. That being the case, there was no need to refer the issue to the Assessing Officer for verification. Therefore, in our considered opinion, there is no violation of rule–46A in the instant case. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition of investment advisory fees in the impugned assessment year - HELD THAT:- We have concurred with the view expressed by the learned CIT(A) that investment advisory fee received from INVIL is not taxable in the impugned assessment year. Therefore, the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) was rightly deleted by the learned CIT(A). - Revenue appeal dismissed. Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - to tax the investment advisory receivable from INVIL - HELD THAT:- While deciding the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2009–10 in the earlier part of the order, we have upheld the decision of learned CIT(A) that the investment advisory fees received by the assessee from INVIL on settlement of dispute is assessable in the assessment year 2010–11. Therefore, the income has already been assessed in the assessment year 2010–11. That being the case, learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that in the absence of any escapement of income, there cannot be any re–opening of assessment u/s 147 . Grounds are dismissed.
|