Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Acit Circle 2, vs Niit Online Learning Ltd, on 5 August, 2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH 'A', NEW DELHI Before Sh. Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 3903/Del/2006 : Asstt. Year : 200203 ITA No. 3901/Del/2006 : Asstt. Year : 200304 ITA No. 3902/Del/2006 : Asstt. Year : 200405 ACIT, Vs M/s NIIT Online Learning Ltd., Circle2, 234, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi PhaseI, New Delhi110020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAABCN1113B CO No. 264/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 200203 CO No. 265/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 200304 CO No. 266/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 200405 M/s NIIT Online Learning Ltd., Vs ACIT, 234, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle2, PhaseI, New Delhi110020 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAABCN1113B Assessee by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Special Counsel, Sh. Karlav Mehrotra, Adv. Date of Hearing: 10.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 05.08.2022 ORDER Per The appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders ld. CIT(A)III, New Delhi dated 20.09.2006. 2 ITA Nos. 3901, 3902 & 3903/Del/2006 CO Nos. 264, 265 & 266/Del/2010 NIIT Online Learning Ltd. 2. Since, the issues involved in all these appeals are identical, they were heard together and being adjudicated by a common order. 3. The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue on the following grounds: "On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,89,41,731/ which was made on account of disallowance of depreciation on claim of purchase of software from M/s HiTech Software Ltd., the genuineness of which was not established." 4. NIIT Online Learning Ltd. ("Assessee") has also filed a crossobjection on the following ground: "That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowance of depreciation amounting to Rs. 2,89,41,731/ in respect of software purchased from HiTech Software Ltd. in the assessment completed under Section 153A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 is not sustainable since the said disallowance is not based on any material/document found during the course of search." 5. NIIT Online Learning Limited ('the assessee'), a limited company, was engaged in the business of providing online computer education. On 10th November 2004, search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') was conducted in the case of NIIT Ltd., NIIT Technologies Ltd., NIIT CIS Ltd. and other individuals forming part of the diversified NIIT group. 3 ITA Nos. 3901, 3902 & 3903/Del/2006 CO Nos. 264, 265 & 266/Del/2010 NIIT Online Learning Ltd. 6. The Assessee has also filed an additional ground of appeal under Rule 11 on the jurisdictional issue, claiming that no search had taken place at their premises. Admission of Additional Grounds: 7. With regard to the filing of additional evidence, it was the primary contention of Revenue that the additional ground raised by the Respondent cannot be heard and adjudicated unless the CO filed by the Respondent is admitted by the Bench after condoning the delay. The Respondents cannot be given the liberty to beat a judicial process by suggesting that since the additional ground raised by them raises a jurisdictional issue, that should be heard first and all other issues would then become only academic. This is a blatant attempt to bypass a statutory judicial process under which they have to plead for the admission of additional ground of appeal. What the Respondent are trying to do is to evade their explanation about condonation of delay and seeking to persuade the bench that the entire proceedings are without jurisdiction and therefore the bench need not go into the question of the admission of the CO or into the merits of Revenue's appeal. It is submitted that such a plea is wholly untenable. 8. On the other hand, the ld. AR argued that admittedly, the assessee