SOTC TRAVEL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3758/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 August 2025AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)8 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had already offered the amount of Rs. 18,11,71,802/- to tax as part of its net profit, and the adjustment by the CPC was due to a mismatch in reporting on the IT portal. Therefore, the addition made u/s 41(1) was set aside. Regarding the TDS credit, the AO was directed to verify the TDS amount and allow credit as per law upon production of necessary evidence by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee included unclaimed credit balances written back u/s 41(1) of Rs. 18,11,71,802/- in its profit and loss account, thereby offering it to tax. However, due to a discrepancy between the hard copy and the uploaded version of the tax audit report on the IT portal, the CPC made an adjustment, which the Addl/JCIT(A) sustained. Additionally, the assessee sought credit for TDS of Rs. 2,37,074/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition under Section 41(1) for unclaimed credit balances is justified when the amount has already been credited to the profit and loss account and offered to tax, despite a discrepancy in the uploaded tax audit report. 2. Whether the assessee is entitled to claim TDS credit upon verification by the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 41(1),Section 143(1)(a)(iv),Section 199,Section 40A(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

For Appellant: Ms. Pratiksha P.Jain
For Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Kolkata [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 29-03-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24. 2. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR taken us through Ground No.2 of the assessee‟s appeal and submitted that the Addl/JCIT(A) has erred in sustaining the action of the AO/CPC, in making the addition of Rs.18,11,71,802/- u/s. 41(1) of the Act, without appreciating that the said amount has already been considered by the assessee while filing its return of income and the same resulted in double taxation. In thi

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 41(1)

All 1,943 judgments and leading authorities on Section 41(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →