RACHNA CREDIT CAPITAL PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“D” BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3291/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Rachna Credit Capital Pvt. DCIT Circle 8(1)(1), Mumbai Ltd. Room No 624, 6th Floor, 9/178, ChandreshwarBhavan, vs. AayakarBhavan, Maharishi Sion West, Mumbai, Karve Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400022 Maharashtra, 400020

PAN: AAACR2495M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Himanshu Gandhi & Brijesh Vyas C.A. For Revenue : Shri Sandeep Lakra CIT DR Date of Hearing : 18.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M :

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 22.01.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, wherein the Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in addition of Rs, 1,11,56,000/- on account of disallowance of CSR Expenses under section 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 despite of the fact that the appellant has not claimed such expenses under any of the head of Income. 2. Without Prejudice to Ground No 1 above, On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing the enhanced

ITA No. 3291/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2015-16 Rachna Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. deduction under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of enhanced total income. 3. Without Prejudice to Ground No 1 above, On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in not allowing the enhanced MAT Credit of Rs. 49,05,410 which the appellant company is entitled on account of revision in total income. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in initiation of the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act,1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming charging of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. Appellant craves leave to add further grounds 0R to amend 0R alter the existing grounds of appeal on 0R before the date of hearing.” 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 26.03.2022, wherein the Assessing Officer has disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,11,56,000/- being the CSR expenditure claimed by the assessee and the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 10,18,22,480/- as against the originally assessed income u/s. 143(3), dated 29.03.2015 at Rs.9,06,66,475/-. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who has since sustained the said disallowance. Against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

ITA No. 3291/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2015-16 Rachna Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. before the ld. PCIT, during the course of revisionary and set-aside proceedings and thereafter, again before the ld. CIT(A), however, the same has not been appreciated and merely basis the fact that the CSR expenditure has been debited in the profit/loss account and reflected in the audited financial statement, the disallowance has been made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that where the assessee has not claimed any CSR expenditure u/s. 37(1) of the Act at first place and the whole of the income has been offered to tax on gross basis, the question of claim of the CSR expenditure does not arise and therefore, the disallowance so made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) be directed to be set aside. We find merit in the contentions so advanced by the ld. AR which is duly supported by the documentation placed on record in terms of the return of income as well as the computation of income and we find that the assessee has not claimed any CSR expenditure u/s. 37(1) of the Act and in absence of any claim, the question of disallowance doesn’t arise for consideration. In light of the same, the addition so made and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside. In the result, ground no. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

ITA No. 3291/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2015-16 Rachna Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd.

Mumbai, Dated: 24.06.2026 Karishma J. Pawar, SR. PS

Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file

By Order

Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai