ACIT, DELHI vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED, DELHI

1 ITA No. 4150/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH: “G” NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4150/DEL/2025 ( A.Y 2021-22) Assistant Commissioner of Vs Steel Authority of India Limited Income Tax, Room No. 225E, Ispat Bhawan, Lodi Road, H. O. 2and Floor, C. R. Building, I P Aliganj, south East Delh-110003, Estate, New Delhi, 110002] New Delhi PAN: AAACS7062F (RESPONDENT) (APPLICANT) Appellant by Sh. Madan Mohan Tiwari, AR Respondent by Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Date of Hearing 27.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 13 .05.2026

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT(A) Panchkula, (‘Ld.

CIT(A)’ for short), New Delhi dated 05/05/2025 for the Assessment Year

2021-22.

“Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.37,74,00,000/- account of double disallowance made by the assessee which was not actually added back in the computation of income by the assessce (without verification made from the ITR)”.

CIT(A) which has been reproduced in the order impugned of the CIT(A)

are as under:

2 ITA No. 4150/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

“The company admitted as income of Rs 18.91 crores made up of Business income of 3973.14 crores fully set off against BF Business Loss of Rs 8536.60 crores and unabsorbed depreciation of Rs 13854.92 crores to make it Nil with still CF losses of Rs 18418.38 crores remaining and Long Term Capital gains of Rs 18.91 crores. The company had claimed allowance of Rs 507.64 crores u/s 43B out of past disallowances which have not been considered. The profits and losses on assets in PNL account shown in TAR and adjusted in the computation of Taxable income as Capital Gains or in Block of assets have been excluded to the extent of Rs 54.77 crores. The adjustment of Rs 8,74,155 u/s 40(a)(i)(ia) of the Act is apparently due to typographical error Further the adjustments are in Profits and Gains of business which get set off against BF business losses & unabsorbed depreciation of much higher magnitude The intimation also shows that it is not considering the BF losses for AY 16-17 and 17-18 purportedly for not stating the date of returns submissions though they appear in the ITR uploaded. Consequently, the income determined and demand raised are wrong. The above adjustments made in the intimation u/s 143(1) are in our opinion are adjustments beyond the scope of Section 143(1) of the Act. Hence this appeal. Further facts will be explained at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order

dated 05/05/2025, deleted the addition of Rs. 5,476 on the ground that

the same amounts to double addition. Aggrieved by the deletion of

addition of Rs. 37,74,00,000/-, Revenue preferred the captioned Appeal

on the grounds mentioned above.

committed error in deleting the addition of Rs. 37,74,00,000/- on

3 ITA No. 4150/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

account of double disallowance made by the Assessee which was not

actuallyadded back in the computation of income by the Assessee,

wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has not made verification from the ITR. Thus,

submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be reversed.

Ld. CIT(A) after the verification of the material on record, satisfied that

the net loss on sale of assets of Rs. 3,774lakhs has been added back in

the computation of taxable assets at Item No. 5, therefore, rightly held

that same is amounts to double addition and deleted the addition, which

requires no interference in the hands of the Tribunal.

on record. As could be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld.

CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition on the ground that the net loss on

sale of assets of Rs. 3,774lakhs has been added back in the computation

of taxable assets as Item No. 5, therefore, the impugned addition

amounts to double addition. However, while deleting the addition, the

Ld. CIT(A) has relied on the reply dated 12/07/2024 of the Assessee and

nowhere mentioned regarding verification of the said fact from the ITR of

the Assessee or any other or documentary evidence. Considering the

above facts and circumstances, we remand the matter to the file of the

4 ITA No. 4150/Del/2025 ACIT Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

A.O. with a direction to verify the ITR of the Assessee and pass fresh

order and if the contention of the Assessee that the said loss is already

added back to the income no further addition to be made by the A.O.

8.In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

purpose.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 13th Day of May 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13 /05/2026 R. Naheed * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI