Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed an order concerning additions made by the AO for club expenses and AIR mismatch. The Ld. Commissioner deleted the club expense addition but sustained part of the AIR mismatch addition.
Held
The tribunal found the Ld. Commissioner's conclusion that the appeal was dismissed to be factually incorrect, as it had partly allowed the assessee's claim. The tribunal rectified the order to reflect that the appeal was partly allowed.
Key Issues
Whether the conclusion of the appellate order accurately reflected the partial allowance of the assessee's appeal.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
O R D E R Per:Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 13.09.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2015-16.
In this case, the Assessing Officer, vide Assessment Order dated 13.11.2017 u/s.143(3) of the Act, made the additions of Rs.23,503/- and 6,49,078/- on account of disallowances made qua club expenses and Annual Information Return (AIR) mismatch, respectively. The Assessee being aggrieved and by filing first appeal challenged the said additions before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order though deleted
1. International Reinsurance and Insurance Consultancy and Broking Services Private Limited the addition of Rs.23,503/- made on account of disallowance of club expenses, however, sustained the addition of Rs.4,57,120/- to the extent of Rs.1,39,743/- + Rs.52,216/-. However, in the conclusion mentioned the following result: -
“5.Conclusion: - In the result, the appeal of the Appellant is dismissed.
The Assessee before us has claimed that before the Ld. Commissioner, it has already filed a rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act, on dated 03.10.2025 inter-alia challenging the merits of the case and/or sustaining the addition in part and therefore it intends to continue with such rectification application in the context of the merits of the case and thus,not agitating the addition, sustained on merit. Thus, in view of above stand taken by the Assessee, the addition sustained, need no adjudication by this Court.
However, the Assessee agitating the sole grievance, which relates to the conclusion mentioned by the Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order, as “dismissal of the Assessee’s Appeal”, whereas it is a fact that the Ld. Commissioner has partly allowed the claim of the Assessee by deleting the addition of Rs.23,503/- on account of club fees and expenses in total and the addition of Rs.4,57,120/- in respect of mismatch in Annual Information Return (AIR), in part and therefore, we are in agreement with the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the result of the Appeal by way of impugned order, would be as under:
“Conclusion: - In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed”.
Thus, para No.5 of the impugned order, is rectified accordingly with the direction that result of the Assessee’s appeal decided by the Ld. Commissioner, be read as under.
“Conclusion: - In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed”.
International Reinsurance and Insurance Consultancy and Broking Services Private Limited 6. In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.03.2026.