Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) concerning Assessment Year 2017-18. The appeal raised grounds challenging the CIT(A)'s order for not properly applying mind to facts and legal provisions, and specifically regarding a net profit calculation error and double disallowance of expenditure in the intimation under Section 143(1).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that depreciation was wrongly disallowed and requested an opportunity to refer the matter back to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for rectification. The Tribunal agreed and referred the matter to the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not rectifying mistakes apparent from the record, specifically concerning the calculation of net profit and double disallowance of expenditure, and if the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for rectification.
Sections Cited
143(1), 154, 37, 28, 44DA
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR.BRR KUMAR & Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Gujarat State Aviation Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Infrastructure Company Ward-2(1)(1), Limited, Ahmedabad. Mro Complex, Government of Gujarat, Nr. Torrent Sub Station, SVPI Airport, Shahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004. [PAN No. AADCG8945Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Parin Shah, AR Respondent by: Adjournment Application filed Date of Hearing 15.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.04.2025 O R D E R DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi vide order dated 13.11.2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Asst.Year 2017-18 - 2– 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal)-National Faceless Appeal Centre ['the CIT(A)'] erred in passing the Order without application of mind to the fact of the case and legal provisions and uploading the action of the Income-tax Officer-Ward 2(1)(1)- Ahmedabad ('the Ld. AO).
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that there is no mistake apparent from the record which can be rectified under section 154 of the Act, for want of the irrelevant and uncalled documentary evidences, without appreciating the facts that: a. In the intimation u/s 143(1), the net profit of Rs. 1,44,77,479/- has been considered instead of Nil profit as per books of accounts declared in (item 45 of part A of P&L in ITR Form-6) the return of income filed. In fact Rs. 1,44,77,479/- is mentioned at item 44 of part A of P&L in ITR Form-6 as "Depreciation and amortisation". b. The disallowance of 1,23,689 made u/s 37 in the intimation under section 143(1) had already been made u/s 28 to 44DA in return of Income filed and accepted in the intimation also. Hence, it has resulted in double disallowance of same expenditure in two different sections. 3. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend all or any of the grounds before the final hearing.
3. At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the depreciation claim by the assessee has been wrongly disallowed and prayed that given an opportunity, the matter would be referred before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee fairly submitted that the matter needs rectification at the level of the Assessing Officer, after going into the amount of depreciation claimed by the assessee. Hence, the matter is hereby referred to the Asst.Year 2017-18 - 3– Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for examination and to pass an order.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.