IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.स/ं .I.T.A No.261/Del/2024 िनधा(cid:9)रणवष(cid:9)/Assessment Years:2018-19 SICPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED बनाम Additional Joint Deputy

308-312, Mercantile House 15, Vs. ACIT, K.G. Marg, New Delhi. Income Tax Department, PAN No.AADCS6121L National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi.

अपीलाथ(cid:20) Appellant (cid:22)(cid:23)यथ(cid:20)/Respondent आ.अ.स/ं .I.T.A No.244/Del/2024 िनधा(cid:9)रणवष(cid:9)/Assessment Year:2016-17 SICPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED बनाम DCIT, 308-312, Mercantile House 15, Vs. Circle 23(2), K.G. Marg, New Delhi. C.R. Building, ITO, PAN No.AADCS6121L I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

अपीलाथ(cid:20) Appellant (cid:22)(cid:23)यथ(cid:20)/Respondent आ.अ.स/ं .I.T.A No.260/Del/2024 िनधा(cid:9)रणवष(cid:9)/Assessment Year:2017-18 SICPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED बनाम DCIT, 308-312, Mercantile House 15, Vs. Circle 23(2), K.G. Marg, New Delhi. C.R. Building, ITO, PAN No.AADCS6121L I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

अपीलाथ(cid:20) Appellant (cid:22)(cid:23)यथ(cid:20)/Respondent &

आ.अ.स/ं .I.T.A No.386/Del/2024 िनधा(cid:9)रणवष(cid:9)/Assessment Year:2017-18 DCIT, बनाम SICPA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Central Circle-06, Vs. 308-312, Mercantile House 15, Third Floor, ARA Centre, K.G. Marg, New Delhi.

Jhandewalan Extension, PAN No.AADCS6121L New Delhi.

अपीलाथ(cid:20) Appellant (cid:22)(cid:23)यथ(cid:20)/Respondent Assessee by Shri Akash Singhal, CA Revenue by Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR सनु वाईक(cid:8)तारीख/ Date of hearing: 07.03.2025 उ(cid:14)ोषणाक(cid:8)तारीख/Pronouncement on 07.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

All these four appeals are filed by the Assessee and Revenue against different orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-24, New Delhi for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19.

2. In so far as the Revenue’s appeal is concerned i.e. ITA No.386/Del/2024 for the AY 2017-18 Ld. Counsel submits that dispute in Revenue’s appeal is with respect to disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.77,90,200/- as per rectification order dated 21.01.2020 and the Revenue impact in this appeal is less than Rs.60 lakhs and therefore in view of Board Circular appeal of the Department is not maintainable. The case of the Department would not fall in the exceptions provided in the above Board Circulars. This appeal is not maintainable to which the Ld. DR fairly agreed.

3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that the Revenue in the grounds of appeal filed before the Tribunal had stated that the disallowance is to the tune of Rs.7,79,02,000/-

which is not the correct amount as per the rectification order. The disallowance u/s 14A is only Rs.77,90,200/- on which the Revenue effect is less than Rs.60 lacs.

4. The Ld. DR could not controvert the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel. Perusal of the rectification order suggests that the total addition in dispute u/s 14A is Rs.77,90,200/- and the Revenue effect on this disallowance is certainly less than Rs.60 lacs. Therefore, in view of the Circular of CBDT Vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 this appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

5. Coming to the other three appeals of the assessee the issue is in respect of disallowance of section 14A and the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in the absence of recording of satisfaction no disallowance could have been made u/s 14A read with Rule 8D by the Assessing Officer.

6. Ld. Counsel further submits that identical issue came up before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.9604/Del/2019 for the AY 2008-09 and the Tribunal by order dated 18.08.2023 deleted the disallowance in the absence of proper satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer.

7. Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Perusal of the assessment orders for the AY 2016-17, 2017- 18 and 2018-19 would suggest that the Assessing Officer mechanically applied Rule 8D without recording any satisfaction on the incurring of expenses by