IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 5003/DEL/2024 A.YR. : 2022-23 DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), Vs. DELHI TOURISM &

NEW DELHI TRANSPORTATION ROOM NO. 406, 4^TH FLOOR, C.R. DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, LTD., NEW DELHI – 2 18A, SCO COMPLEX, (PAN: AAACD0169J) DEFENCE COLONY, NEW DELHI – 24 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Shri Pancham Sethi, CA & Shri Saurabh Gupta, CA Department by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 29.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.04.2025 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated

06.09.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi in relation to assessment year 2022-23 on the following grounds:-

i) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.

CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition made by the AO amounting to Rs. 6,63,46,000/- on account of Unspent Revenue Grant.

ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.

CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition made by the AO amounting to Rs. 29,52,000/- on account of prior period expenses.

2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is wholly owned State Government Company (PSU) under Government of NCT of Delhi. It filed the return of income for the year under consideration by declaring income of Rs. 1,06,97,270/-. Subsequently, the case was selected under CASS and notices u/s. 143(2), 142(1) and a show cause notice was issued and duly served upon the assessee. The Assessing Officer passed the order u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 26.02.2024 by making an addition of Rs. 7,02,43,000/- and determined total income at Rs. 8,09,40,270/-. Against the aforesaid action of the AO, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 06.09.2024 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the ld. CIT(A)’s order, Revenue is in appeal before us.

3. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Apropos ground no. 1 relating to issue of Unspent Revenue Grant is concerned, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT in assessee’s own case for the AYs 2014-15 (ITA No. 184/Del/2009), 2015-16 (ITA No. 4737/Del/2019) & 2016-17 (ITA No. 5922/Del/2019) dated 14.09.2023, which was followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in his order and decided the issue in dispute in favour of the assessee, hence, it was requested to respectfully follow the precedent in assessee’s own case, and accordingly, appeal of the revenue may be dismissed by upholding the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR fairly agreed to this proposition.

4. Upon careful consideration, we not that pursuant to the disallowance made by the AO, Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by holding as under:-

“5.2 Ground No. 2 raised in this appeal pertains to the addition made against the unspent revenue grant of Rs. 6,63,46,000/-. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant in support of its claim, has quoted judgement of the jurisdictional Hon’ble ITAT, New Delhi in its own case for the AYs 2014-15 (ITA No. 184/Del/2009), 2015-16 (ITA No. 4737/Del/2019) & 2016-17 (ITA No. 5922/Del/2019) dated 14.09.2023 which squarely covers the facts of the present case. Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT discussed above, the AO is directed delete the addition made in the assessment order amounting to Rs. 6,63,46,000/- and the appellant succeeds in this ground of appeal.”

4.1 We further note that ITAT in assessee’s own case for the AYs 2014-15 (ITA No. 184/Del/2009), 2015-16 (ITA No. 4737/Del/2019) & 2016-17 (ITA No. 5922/Del/2019) dated 14.09.2023, has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by holding as under:-

“57. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. It is found that the assesse