ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7578/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 August 2022AY 2006-072 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's concession that the CIT(A) had inadvertently granted relief on the entire closing stock. The relief granted by the CIT(A) was vacated.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer appealed the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition related to unutilized modvat credit on closing stock. The CIT(A) had granted relief on the entire closing stock instead of just the difference between opening and closing stock.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in granting relief on the entire closing stock when the addition was only on the difference between opening and closing stock.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI A BENCH, MUMBAI

Appearances by: Yogesh Thar along with Chaitanya D. Joshi & Sukanya Jayaram for the appellant Shailja Rai along with Manoj Sinha for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 08/08/2022 Date of pronouncing the order : 08/08/2022

ORAL ORDER (Dictated in the open court) Per Pramod Kumar VP

1.

By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 25.09.2013, passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of order given effect to the CIT(A)’s order in the matter of assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2006-07.

2.

Grievance raised by the Assessing Officer is as follow:-

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing to delete the addition made by AO on unutilized modvat credit referable to closing stock based on Assessment Year: 2006-07 Page 2 of 2 CIT(A)’s order dated 12.09.2011 without appreciating the facts that relief was given on net addition of Rs. 7,41,62,393/- .

3.

When this appeal came up for hearing Shri Yogesh Thar, learned counsel for the assessee fairly accepted that he has to concede the point inasmuch as while the disputed addition for only in respect of the difference between opening stock and closing stock, but the learned CIT(A) inadvertently has given relief in respect of the entire closing stock. The learned Departmental Representative obviously does not oppose the stand of the assessee.

4.

In view of the above discussions and as agreed to the parties the impugned relief granted by the learned CIT(A) stands vacated and the appellant succeeds on this issues.

5.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. Pronouncement and dictated in the open court today on the 08th August, 2022.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →