DCIT,CIRCLE-5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GO AIRLINES(INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4612/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 July 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Ι.Τ.Α. No. 4612/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2022-23 DCIT, Circle – 5(1)(1), Mumbai Go Airlines (India) Ltd. Vs C/o Britannia Industries Limited A-33, Lawrence Road Industrial Area New Delhi - 110035 [PAN: AACCG2599K] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Ujjval Gangwal, A/R Revenue by: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT, D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16/07/2021 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed a rectification application under Section 154, which was allowed by the CPC. Subsequently, the return was selected for scrutiny, and the AO accepted the returned income. Therefore, the Tribunal found no merit in the revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

The revenue preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2022-23. The primary issue was the deletion of an adjustment made by the CPC regarding the increase in profit due to a deviation in the method of valuation under Section 145A.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the CPC's adjustment for profit increase due to deviation in valuation method, especially after the rectification order and acceptance of returned income by the AO during scrutiny assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145A,Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Ujjval Gangwal, A/R
Hearing: 16/07/2025Pronounced: 16/07/2025

O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A)/Addl./JCIT(A) – 5, Chennai [hereinafter ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20/10/2023 pertaining to AY 2022-23.

2.

The grievance of the revenue reads as under:- “1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Addl. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the adjustment of Rs. 5,24,56,79,962/-made by the CPC on account of increase in profit due to deviation in method of valuation u/s 145A of the Act in the intimation u/s 143(1) dated 17.01.2023?" 2. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Addl, CIT(A) has erred in ignoring that the assessee has not disclosed the Increase in profit of Rs. 5,24,56,79,962/- computed on account of deviation in method of valuation u/s 145A in the relevant clause of the Part A-Ol of the return of income filed for AY 2022-23 and that the same is shown at "0"(Zero) therein?"

2 3. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Addl. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the assessee was duty bound to disclose the variation in profit computed in accordance with the provisions of section 145A of the Act in the relevant clause of Part A-Ol of the return of income and that under the circumstances, adjustment of Rs: 5,24,56,79,962/- was rightly made by the CPC in the intimation n/s 143(1) dated 17.01.2023 issued for AY 2022-23 by reducing the business loss to that extent?" The appellant prays that the order of the Addi, CIT(A) on the grounds be set aside and confirm the order of the AO. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter all or any of the grounds of appeal.”

More judgments on Section 145A

All 656 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →