PR CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.

1. These appeals by the Revenue under Section 260 A ofthe Income Tax ITA 535/2015 „, Page I of[3] 2015:DHC:11383-DB Act, 1961 ('Act')are directed against the order dated 19^ December,2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT') in ITA Nos.4959/Del/2012 and 5401/Del/2013 for the Assessment Years ('AY') 2009-10 and 2010-11.

2. As far as the issue relating to depreciation being allowed to the Assessee in respectofthe World Trade Centre and the World Trade Tower buildings under Section 32 of the Act, the question stands answered against the Revenue by an order dated 24th July 2015 passed by this Court in ITA No.69/2000{CITv.BharatHotelsLtd.).

3. The other issue in these appeals is whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer(AO)invoking Section 14A ofthe Act read with Rule 8D ofthe Income Tax Rules, 1962 wasjustified? In this regard,the ITAT hasintheimpugned ordernoted thefollowing"undisputedfacts": "(i) The assessee did not receive dividend during the year under consideration.

(ii) The investment was made by Assessee Company in subsidiary companiesfor strategic purposes. (iii)The investment during the year was made in a subsidiary company which was situated outside India and,therefore the dividend income if ITA 535/2015 anyreceived from foreign companies wasnotexempt."

4. The ITAT has rightly followed the decision of this Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd.(2014)272 CTR (Del)282 and held that since no exempt dividend income was earned the question ofinvoking Section 14 A ofthe Actread with Rule 8D did not arise.

5. The Revenue has not been able to persuade this Court that the above factual determination is perverse orthatin thefacts and circumstances ofthe decisionofthis Courtin CITv.HolcimPvt.Ltd.{supra)would notapply.

6. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises. The appeals are dismissed.

AUGUST 11,2015 MK S.MURALIDHAR,J VIBHUBAKHRU,J