Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ORDER
Mahavir Singh, Vice President
1. These four appeals by the assessee are arising out of the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai in ITA Nos. 50/14-15, 94/15-16, 130, 131, 329/16-17 & 79/17-18 dated 22.02.2019. The assessments were framed by the DCIT/ACIT/ITO, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai for the relevant assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA or 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act') vide their orders of different dates 30.03.2016, 31.03.2016, 31.12.2016 & 13.12.2017 respectively.
2. First, we will take up ITA No. 1391/CHNY/2019 for the assessment year 2012-13.
3. The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in treating the advance received from customers as income of the previous year relevant to this assessment year without considering the fact that it did not accrue to the assessee during the relevant year. For this, assessee has raised following Ground No. 2:-
2. Advance from customers
2.1 The CIT(A) erred in confirming the treatment of advance received from customers amounting to Rs. 32,46,007 as income of the previous year relevant to the above assessment year without considering the fact that it did not accrue to the Appellant during the relevant year.
2.2 The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the revenue recognition has been made by the Appellant in accordance with the method prescribed by Accounting Standard 9 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and the same method has been regularly employed by the Appellant.
2.3 The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that merely because the Appellant has received the entire amount in advance shall not mean that the Appellant is entitled to such income during the relevant assessment year.
2.4 The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the advance received cannot be treated as income of the year as no corresponding services have been rendered to the clients during the year.
4. Brief facts are that the assessee runs an internet based matrimonial match making and advertisement portal called 'matrimony.com'. The AO on perusal of accounts of the assessee noted that the assessee has shown a sum of Rs. 18,59,43,115/- as advance received from customers as on 31.03.2012. The AO noted that the accounting treatment and taxability of the same is examined while framing assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act for the assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12. Therefore, he noted that in consistent view, he also treated the income as realized for the services rendered and related expenditure incurred, accounted for and allowed accordingly. Therefore, the AO treated the advance received from customers during the year amounting to Rs. 4,99,64,760/- out of total receipts of Rs. 18,59,43,115/- was brought to tax as business income for the relevant assessment year 2012-13. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A).
5. The CIT(A) adjudicating this issue allowed 90% of the amount claimed received in advance and balance 10% has been allowed to be taxed in the next year. The CIT(A) noted that this is the case in which the assessee company has attempted to account the expenditure in the year of receipt but postponed the accounting of revenue in succeeding years. But the CIT(A) following the Tribunal's decision in assessee's own case for assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12 allowed the ground but brought to tax an amount of Rs. 32,46,007/- being advance receipt from customers for tax by observing in para 10 as under:-
10. The claim made by the assessee as above is different from the facts narrated by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. The assessee company had a........