The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 v. Max Medical Services Pvt. Ltd.

1. These are appeals by the Revenue against the common order dated 13^*^ September 2017 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(TTAT')in ITA No.4050 and 4051/Del/2014 for Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12.

2. The common question sought to be urged by the Revenue is whether the ITAT isjustified in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer ('AO')on account ofthe change in percentage ofprofit ofthe Assessee and MI/s Devki Devi Foundation fi 'om 10%to 8%? 2019:DHC:7406-DB

3. The admitted facts are that the Assessee is engaged in a business of constructions ofhospitals,leasing and sale ofmedical equipments and deals in chemicals,medicines and drugs.Thereturns filed forthe AYsin question were picked up for scrutiny. One ofthe issues that arose was the agreement entered into between the Assessee and the aforementioned M/s Devki Devi Foundation on 10^*^ December 2011,where the profitsharing percentage for the period of30 years was 10%.The Assessee pointed outthat for the AYs in question on account of the business exigencies the profit sharing percentage had been reduced from 10% to 8%. Although, the AO did not accept the explanation offered by the Assessee, it has been found to be acceptable both by Commissioner ofIncome Tax - CIT(A)in the order dated 22"^^ April2014andtheITATintheimpugned order.

4. The impugned order in fact discusses the relevant clauses of the agreement and concludes that the explanation offered by the Assessee as accepted by the CIT-A was believable.

5. The points raised against the views of the CIT - A and the ITAT are essentially factual and the Court sees no substantial question oflaw arising inthe present appeal.

6. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. The pending applications are also, dismissed. sTkWaiIotar,j. LS.MEHTA,J.