MARSH INDIA INSURANCE BROKERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ASSTT/CIT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI, DELHI
Facts
The assessee, Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd., filed two appeals against assessment orders for AY 2016-17 and 2017-18. The appeals challenged issues including transfer pricing adjustments, non-grant of deductions, levy of interest under sections 234A and 234B/C, computation of book profit, and initiation of penalty proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal admitted the appeals despite a delay, citing the Covid-19 pandemic period. Several grounds were withdrawn by the assessee, including the transfer pricing adjustment and an additional ground regarding limitation. Grounds related to interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C were restored to the Assessing Officer for verification. The ground regarding book profit computation under section 115JB was allowed for statistical purposes, directing rectification. The penalty proceedings ground was dismissed as premature.
Key Issues
The appeals concerned challenges to transfer pricing adjustments, interest levies (234A, 234B, 234C), deduction claims, book profit computation (115JB), and penalty proceedings (271(1)(c), 270A).
Sections Cited
Sec 234A, Sec 234B, Sec 234C, Sec 115JB, Sec 271(1)(c), Sec 270A, Sec 143(3), Sec 144C, Sec 153, Sec 139(1), Sec 92E
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate final assessment orders dated 03.04.2021 and 09.02.2022, passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer, National E-
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 2 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short ‘the Assessing Officer’) for Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short ‘the Assessing Officer’) f Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short ‘the Assessing Officer’) f assessment year 2016 assessment year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively.
The grounds raised in both these appeals being common The grounds raised in both these appeals being common The grounds raised in both these appeals being common, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this were heard together and disposed off by way of this were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for convenience and avoid repetition of facts. consolidated order for convenience and avoid repetition of facts. consolidated order for convenience and avoid repetition of facts.
First we take up t First we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment he appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2016-17. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced 17. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced 17. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced as under:
Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the international transaction of payment for services rendered to the international transaction of payment for services rendered to the international transaction of payment for services rendered to the Appellant by its Appellant by its associated enterprise as NIL. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining the arm's length price of the international transaction of payment for the arm's length price of the international transaction of payment for the arm's length price of the international transaction of payment for services rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL and in making an upward adjustment of Rs. 35,37,72,368. and in making an upward adjustment of Rs. 35,37,72,368. Ground No.2 Ground No.2 - Non-grant of deduction under Chapter VI grant of deduction under Chapter VI-A of Rs 4,73,850 On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in no On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in no On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in not granting deduction under Chapter VI granting deduction under Chapter VI-A to the extent of INR 4,73,850. A to the extent of INR 4,73,850. Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to INR 24,96,100 amounting to INR 24,96,100 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in levying interest of Rs 24,96, levying interest of Rs 24,96,100 under section 234A of the Act although 100 under section 234A of the Act although the Appellant had filed its return of income within the due date. the Appellant had filed its return of income within the due date. the Appellant had filed its return of income within the due date. Ground No. 4: Levying consequential interest under section 234B Ground No. 4: Levying consequential interest under section 234B Ground No. 4: Levying consequential interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to INR 7,61,31,050 of the Act amounting to INR 7,61,31,050 On the facts and circumstances of the case, On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in the learned AO erred in levying consequential interest of Rs 7,61,31,050 under section 234B of levying consequential interest of Rs 7,61,31,050 under section 234B of levying consequential interest of Rs 7,61,31,050 under section 234B of the Act.
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 3 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the iating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the iating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the above adjustments. above adjustments. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of appeal, so as to e appeal, so as to enable the Honourable Income-tax Appellant Tribunal to tax Appellant Tribunal to decide this appeal according to the law. decide this appeal according to the law. 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Registry has pointed out a delay of 209 days in filing the appeal. Registry has pointed out a delay of 209 days in filing the appeal. Registry has pointed out a delay of 209 days in filing the appeal. The Ld. counsel submitted th The Ld. counsel submitted that the impugned assessment order has at the impugned assessment order has been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 03.04.2021 and been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 03.04.2021 and been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 03.04.2021 and therefore, in normal circumstances therefore, in normal circumstances, the appeal was due before the the appeal was due before the Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final has been filed on 28.12.2021. assessment order. But this appeal assessment order. But this appeal has been filed on 28.12.2021. The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. Civil by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. appeal no. 21 of 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 655 of 2021 appeal no. 21 of 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 655 of 2021 appeal no. 21 of 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 655 of 2021 in suo-motu writ peti writ petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, in view of Covid in view of Covid Pandemic period. Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be Pandemic period. Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be Pandemic period. Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be treated as within the limitation period in view of the decision of the treated as within the limitation period in view of the decision of the treated as within the limitation period in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra). The Ld. Departmental Hon’ble Hon’ble Supreme Supreme Court Court (supra). (supra). The The Ld. Ld. Departmental Departmental Representative (DR) did not Representative (DR) did not object for admitting the appeal for object for admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication being within the limitation period in view of the adjudication being within the limitation period in view of the adjudication being within the limitation period in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra). decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra).
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 4 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
In the case, the assessee filed an add In the case, the assessee filed an add In the case, the assessee filed an additional ground challenging the limitation in passing the final assessment order challenging the limitation in passing the final assessment order challenging the limitation in passing the final assessment order following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT (IT) v. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. [2023] 153 of ACIT (IT) v. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. [2023] 153 of ACIT (IT) v. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. [2023] 153 taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) wherein the Hon’ble Bo taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) wherein the Hon’ble Bo Court has relied on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court has relied on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court has relied on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. (W.A. Nos. Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. (W.A. Nos. Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. (W.A. Nos. 1517 and 1519 of 2021). 1517 and 1519 of 2021). However, at the time of the arguments, However, at the time of the arguments, the Ld. counsel for the assessee did not press additional ground the Ld. counsel for the assessee did not press addi the Ld. counsel for the assessee did not press addi and submitted to withdraw the said ground. Accordingly, the and submitted to withdraw the said ground. Accordingly and submitted to withdraw the said ground. Accordingly additional ground of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. additional ground of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. additional ground of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
Regarding the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Ld. counsel for Regarding the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Ld. counsel for Regarding the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee had applied for a unilateral the assessee submitted that assessee had applied for a the assessee submitted that assessee had applied for a advance pricing agreement (APA) agreement (APA) in respect of international in respect of international transaction of the intra group support services. The Ld. counsel for transaction of the intra group support services. The Ld. counsel for transaction of the intra group support services. The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that issue in dispute has been settled under the assessee submitted that issue in dispute has been settled under the assessee submitted that issue in dispute has been settled under the advance pricing agreement the advance pricing agreement, therefore, the assessee wished to the assessee wished to withdraw said ground of the transfer pricing. Accordingly, the said ground of the transfer pricing. Accordingly, the said ground of the transfer pricing. Accordingly, the ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
The ground No. 2 of the appeal relate The ground No. 2 of the appeal relates to deduction of to deduction of Rs.4,73,850/- . This ground . This ground was not pressed by the Ld. counsel on ed by the Ld. counsel on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, same is dismissed as infructuous. behalf of the assessee. Therefore, same is dismissed as infructuous. behalf of the assessee. Therefore, same is dismissed as infructuous.
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 5 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
The ground No. 3 of the appeal is related to levy of interest u/s The ground No. 3 of the appeal is related to levy of interest u/s The ground No. 3 of the appeal is related to levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act amounting to Rs.24,96,100/ 234A of the Act amounting to Rs.24,96,100/-. The Ld. counsel for . The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee submitted that the assessee filed return of income the assessee filed return of income within limitation prescribed under law within limitation prescribed under law and therefore, not liable for and therefore, not liable for interest u/s 234A of the interest u/s 234A of the Income-tax Act ( in short the ‘ tax Act ( in short the ‘Act’). We find that a detailed computation of the interest u/s 234A of the Act that a detailed computation of the interest u/s 234A of the Act that a detailed computation of the interest u/s 234A of the Act which is part of notice of notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act has not been u/s 156 of the Act has not been filed before us and therefore, we restore this matter to the file of the filed before us and therefore, we restore this matter to the file of the filed before us and therefore, we restore this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding in accordance with law after verifying Assessing Officer for deciding in accordance with law after verifying Assessing Officer for deciding in accordance with law after verifying the claim of the assessee of filing return of income within the due the claim of the assessee of filing return of income within t the claim of the assessee of filing return of income within t date u/s 139(1) of the Act. The ground No. 3 of the appeal is date u/s 139(1) of the Act. The ground No. 3 of the appeal is date u/s 139(1) of the Act. The ground No. 3 of the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
The ground No. 4 of the appeal relates to levy of interest u/s The ground No. 4 of the appeal relates to levy of interest u/s The ground No. 4 of the appeal relates to levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. Since, the levy of interest u/s 234B is 234B of the Act. Since, the levy of interest u/s 234B is 234B of the Act. Since, the levy of interest u/s 234B is consequential to change of change of assessed income and therefore, this assessed income and therefore, this ground of appeal is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer ground of appeal is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer ground of appeal is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for determination in accordance with law after verification of the for determination in accordance with law after verification of the for determination in accordance with law after verification of the assessed income consequent to this order of the Tribunal. assessed income consequent to this order of the Tribunal. assessed income consequent to this order of the Tribunal.
The ground No. e ground No. 5 of the appeal relates to initiating penalty to initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Since, the the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has not been levied by way of this order and 271(1)(c) of the Act has not been levied by way of this order and 271(1)(c) of the Act has not been levied by way of this order and therefore, the issue being premature at this stage therefore, the issue being premature at this stage , the ground No. 5 , the ground No. 5 of the appeal is dismissed as is dismissed as infructuous.
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 6 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
Now, we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment we take up the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced 18. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced 18. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced as under:
Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the Ground No. 1: Determining the arm's length price of the international trans international transaction of payment for services rendered to the action of payment for services rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprise as NIL. Appellant by its associated enterprise as NIL. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO, based on the directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in law and on facts, in determining the arm's length the arm's length price of the international transaction of payment for price of the international transaction of payment for services rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL services rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL services rendered to the Appellant by its associated enterprises as NIL and in making an upward adjustment of Rs. 43,55,05,536. and in making an upward adjustment of Rs. 43,55,05,536. Ground No. 2: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act Ground No. 2: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act Ground No. 2: Levying interest under section 234A of the Act amounting to amounting to INR 12,59,749 On the facts and On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in levying interest of levying interest of Rs 12,59,749 under section 234A of the Act without Rs 12,59,749 under section 234A of the Act without appreciating the fact that the Appellant had filed its return of income appreciating the fact that the Appellant had filed its return of income appreciating the fact that the Appellant had filed its return of income within the due date i.e. 30 No within the due date i.e. 30 November 2017 as it is required to furnish vember 2017 as it is required to furnish report under section 92E of the Act. report under section 92E of the Act. Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234C of the Act Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234C of the Act Ground No. 3: Levying interest under section 234C of the Act On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in computing and levying interest under section 234C computing and levying interest under section 234C of the Act amounting of the Act amounting to INR 41,28,779 instead of Rs 28,08,234 without considering the fact to INR 41,28,779 instead of Rs 28,08,234 without considering the fact to INR 41,28,779 instead of Rs 28,08,234 without considering the fact that interest under section 234C of the Act should be restricted to that interest under section 234C of the Act should be restricted to that interest under section 234C of the Act should be restricted to returned income. returned income. Ground No. 4: Erroneous computation of book profit/loss under Ground No. 4: Erroneous computation of book profit/loss under Ground No. 4: Erroneous computation of book profit/loss under section 115JB of section 115JB of the Act On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in computing the deemed total income under section 115JB of the Act as computing the deemed total income under section 115JB of the Act as computing the deemed total income under section 115JB of the Act as INR 1,59,47,87,345 as against Rs 1,56, 13,87,345. INR 1,59,47,87,345 as against Rs 1,56, 13,87,345. Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings under Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings under Ground No. 5: Error in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act n 270A of the Act On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act for under initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act for under initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act for under reporting of income. reporting of income. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, or amend any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of y or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of y or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time or at, the time of
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 7 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
appeal, so as to enable the Honourable Income appeal, so as to enable the Honourable Income-tax Appellant Tribunal to tax Appellant Tribunal to decide this appeal according to the law. decide this appeal according to the law. 11.1 The additional ground raised is also reproduced as under: The additional ground raised is also reproduced as under: The additional ground raised is also reproduced as under:
The Assessment Order passed under section 143(3) read with section ssment Order passed under section 143(3) read with section ssment Order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Act is barred by limitation since the entire assessment 144C of the Act is barred by limitation since the entire assessment 144C of the Act is barred by limitation since the entire assessment proceedings ought to have been completed on or before 31 December proceedings ought to have been completed on or before 31 December proceedings ought to have been completed on or before 31 December 2020 with issuance of final order since the provision section 1 2020 with issuance of final order since the provision section 1 2020 with issuance of final order since the provision section 153 of the Act provides for outer time limit to pass the final order and necessitates Act provides for outer time limit to pass the final order and necessitates Act provides for outer time limit to pass the final order and necessitates completion of the entire proceedings including proceedings before the completion of the entire proceedings including proceedings before the completion of the entire proceedings including proceedings before the Dispute Resolution Panel under section 144C of the Act within such time Dispute Resolution Panel under section 144C of the Act within such time Dispute Resolution Panel under section 144C of the Act within such time limit. The Appellant craves f The Appellant craves for leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute or leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable your Honours to decide this of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable your Honours to decide this of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable your Honours to decide this appeal according to law. appeal according to law. 12. The additional ground raised by the The additional ground raised by the assessee was withdrawn assessee was withdrawn by the Ld. counsel on behalf of the assessee and therefore, same is by the Ld. counsel on behalf of the assessee and therefore, same is by the Ld. counsel on behalf of the assessee and therefore, same is dismissed as infructuous. dismissed as infructuous.
The ground No. 1 relates to the transfer pricing adjustment The ground No. 1 relates to the transfer pricing adjustment The ground No. 1 relates to the transfer pricing adjustment. The said ground has also been withdrawn by the assessee in view of has also been withdrawn by the assessee in view of has also been withdrawn by the assessee in view of advance pricing agreement entered into by the assessee with the tax ce pricing agreement entered into by the assessee with the tax ce pricing agreement entered into by the assessee with the tax authorities of India and therefore, same is dismissed as authorities of India and therefore, same is dismissed as authorities of India and therefore, same is dismissed as infructuous.
The ground Nos s. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee relate to . 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee relate to levy of interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act respectively. The Ld. levy of interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act respecti levy of interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act respecti counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has wrongly presumed that return of income was not filed by the wrongly presumed that return of income was not filed by the wrongly presumed that return of income was not filed by the assessee on or before the due date assessee on or before the due date prescribed and similarly he has and similarly he has not taken into consideration the advance tax paid not taken into consideration the advance tax paid by the assessee
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 8 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
for computation of interest u/s 234C of the Act. Since, detailed for computation of interest u/s 234C of the Act. Since, detailed for computation of interest u/s 234C of the Act. Since, detailed computation of the interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act has not computation of the interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act has not computation of the interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act has not been filed before us , ,therefore, we restore this matter of computing therefore, we restore this matter of computing interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act to interest u/s 234A and 234C of the Act to the file of the Assessing the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding in accordance with law after verification of in accordance with law after verification of in accordance with law after verification of date of filing of return of income and advance tax payment return of income and advance tax payments made by the return of income and advance tax payment assessee. The ground No assessee. The ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In ground No. 4, the assessee has raised that Assessing Officer In ground No. 4, the assessee has raised that Assessing Officer In ground No. 4, the assessee has raised that Assessing Officer has erroneously taken the figure of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act has erroneously taken the figure of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act has erroneously taken the figure of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act at Rs.1,59,47,87,345/ at Rs.1,59,47,87,345/- as against Rs.1,56,13,87,345/ as against Rs.1,56,13,87,345/-. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in the body of the the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in the bo the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in the bo assessment order the Assessing Officer has not made any assessment order the Assessing Officer has not assessment order the Assessing Officer has not adjustment to the book profit adjustment to the book profit ,but erroneously in the computation the computation to the assessment order to the assessment order, has taken figure of the book profit u/s has taken figure of the book profit u/s 115JB 115JB of of the the Act Act at at Rs.1,59,47,87,345/ Rs.1,59,47,87,345/- - as against Rs.1,56,13,87,345/- shown by the assessee ,therefore, shown by the assessee ,therefore, same might be rectified. The Ld. counsel submitted that rectification application be rectified. The Ld. counsel submitted that rectification application be rectified. The Ld. counsel submitted that rectification application filed by the assessee has not been disposed off by the Assessing filed by the assessee has not been disposed off by the Assessing filed by the assessee has not been disposed off by the Assessing Officer.
15.1 We have heard rival submission of the parties on We have heard rival submission of the parties on We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. The ground dispute and perused the relevant material on record. The ground dispute and perused the relevant material on record. The ground raised is mere a matter of verification by the Assessing Officer raised is mere a matter of verification by the Assessing Officer raised is mere a matter of verification by the Assessing Officer
Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 9 ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & ITA Nos. 2471/MUM/2021 & 642/Mum/2022
keeping in view his finding in the body of the assessment order. is finding in the body of the assessment order. is finding in the body of the assessment order. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to carry out the Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to ca Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to ca rectification if he has not already disposed off the rectification rectification if he has not already disposed off the rectification rectification if he has not already disposed off the rectification application of the assessee in this regard. The ground of appeal of application of the assessee in this regard. The ground of appeal of application of the assessee in this regard. The ground of appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
The ground No. 5 of the appeal being relat The ground No. 5 of the appeal being related to ed to initiation of penalty proceedings. Since, no penalty has been levied in the penalty proceedings. Since, no penalty has been levied in the penalty proceedings. Since, no penalty has been levied in the impugned final assessment impugned final assessment order, therefore, this ground of appeal this ground of appeal is premature at this is premature at this stage, and hence, same is dismissed as , same is dismissed as infructuous.
In the result, both the appeal In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical s are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on nounced in the open Court on 13/05/2024. /05/2024. Sd/- Sd/ Sd/- Sd/ (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 13/05/2024 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.
BY ORDER, BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ITAT, Mumbai
