CIT v. Cushman and Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd - 2015-LL-0507-49

Citation	2015-LL-0507-49
Appellant Name	CIT
Respondent Name	Cushman and Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	07/05/2015
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	question of law
Bot Summary:	Whilst issuing notice on 18.02.2015, the Court had followed its previous decision in ITA 475/2012 decided on 23.5.2014) which is in respect of the same assessee, and answered the first question in favour of the Revenue. The surviving question pertains to deletion of 3,40,96,056/- i.e., the Referral Fee paid to the group entity by the assessee. On that date itself the Court had noticed that this question was identical with the surviving question in ITA 475/2012. This Court has today dismissed the said surviving question in ITA 475/2012 urged by the Revenue and held that the similar amount ITA 87/2015 Page 1 could not have been disallowed. Following the reasoning in that judgment, the question urged in the present case too is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The Court had on 18.02.2015 also noticed that the issue pertaining to Section 43B had been remitted to the AO and consequently not framed the question of law. The appeal to the extent of the question framed, i.e., with respect to the disallowance under Section 37 fails and is dismissed.

$ 9 * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON: 07.05.2015 + ITA 87/2015 CIT Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitin Gulati, Jr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD Respondent Through: Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gajendra Maheshwari, Mr. Sumit Batra and Ms. Swati Thapa, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. GAUBA S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT) 1. Whilst issuing notice on 18.02.2015, Court had followed its previous decision in ITA 475/2012 decided on 23.5.2014) which is in respect of same assessee, and answered first question in favour of Revenue. surviving question pertains to deletion of `3,40,96,056/- i.e., Referral Fee paid to group entity by assessee. On that date itself Court had noticed that this question was identical with surviving question in ITA 475/2012. 2. This Court has today dismissed said surviving question in ITA 475/2012 urged by Revenue and held that similar amount ITA 87/2015 Page 1 could not have been disallowed. Consequently, following reasoning in that judgment (ITA 475/2012), question urged in present case too is answered against Revenue and in favour of assessee. 3. Court had on 18.02.2015 also noticed that issue pertaining to Section 43B had been remitted to AO and consequently not framed question of law. 4. appeal to extent of question framed, i.e., with respect to disallowance under Section 37 fails and is dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J R.K.GAUBA, J MAY 07, 2015 /vikas/ ITA 87/2015 Page 2 CIT v. Cushman and Wakefield India Pvt. Ltd

Metadata

Judgment