TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. - ITA Nos. 5848/Del/2015 And 2199/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 27-5-2019 - Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member For the Assessee : SH. Rakesh K. Sehgal, CA For the Department : SH. Banwari Lal, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM These appeals have been fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Principles of res-judicata are not applicable to Income Tax Proceedings and moreover, this issue is yet to attain its stage of finality in the judicial forum is contrary to facts and law as far as (a) that the Judicial Ruling of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Radhasoami Satsag vs CIT 193 ITR 321 has not been considered, wherein it has been held that the department cannot take a u turn on a consistent policy followed by the assessee for number of years and accepted by the department in spite of the fact that the principle of Res Judicata is not applicable to income tax proceedings. Appellant has been following this consistent policy of offering the revenue for taxation, in the year in which services a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een offered by the Appellant for taxation in the subsequent assessment year i.e. AY 2013-14 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 2013-14. 3. The agreement of CIT(A) with the finding of her predecessor in her order that the Principles of res-judicata are not applicable to Income Tax Proceedings and moreover, this issue is yet to attain its stage of finality in the judicial forum. is contrary to facts and law as far as (a) that the Judicial Ruling of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Radhasoami Satsag vs CIT 193 ITR 321 has not been considered, wherein it has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Act ). Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under manual selection. Furst notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 20.9.2012 and further notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act alongwith detailed questionnaire were issued to the assessee. In response to the same, the AR of the assessee attended the proceedings from time to time and filed the details. Assessee is a company and engaged in the business of imparting coaching (Test Preparation) to the students in respect of various entrance examination held in relations to Management, Engineering, and Fashion Designing etc. Necessary details which have been obtained during the course of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revenue authorities as well as ITAT, B Bench, New Delhi decision dated 10.4.2015 passed in ITA No. 1697/Del/2014 AY 2010-11 in assessee s own case. We find that exactly this similar issue has already been dealt and adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee s own case, as aforesaid, wherein the Tribunal vide para no. 8 to 11 has held as under:- 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On a consideration of the arguments advanced by the Id. CIT DR and the findings of the AO upheld by the Ld. CIT(A), it is seen that the issue has been fully considered on similarity facts in 2006- 07 assessment year wherein the ITAT considering the same Revenue recognition policy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of section 36(l)(ii) of the Act? IV. Whether the claim of the respondent for extra depreciation on commuters peripherals amounting to ₹ 1,65,115/- @ 60% V. Whether the ITAT rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 12,01,0000/- made by the assessing officer on the receipt of non refundable admission fee by the respondent from the students in the' relevant year? 9. It is seen that the Hon ble High Court vide its order dated 14.11.201 in ITA No.- 926/Del/2011 was pleased to admit only two of the following questions:- (1) whether the respondent had failed/neglected to deduct tax at sourced under section 194C and accordingly Section 40(A)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
