VEEKAY INFIN & HOLDINGS P. LTD,PUNE vs. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12, PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 922/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 July 2024AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CPC processing under section 143(1) cannot go beyond the return filed. Since the claim for cost of indexation was made for the first time before the CIT(A), and the CIT(A) cannot entertain a fresh claim that the CPC could not have considered, the CIT(A) rightly rejected the claim.

What were the facts?

The assessee company offered capital gains on sale of unlisted shares without claiming cost of indexation. The CPC processed the return under section 143(1) and raised a demand for interest under section 234C. The CIT(A) allowed relief on section 234C interest but dismissed the claim for cost of indexation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can entertain a fresh claim for cost of indexation on capital gains when it was not claimed in the original return processed under section 143(1).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathi
Hearing: 15.07.2024Pronounced: 26.07.2024

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of CIT(A) dated 29.02.2024 for the A.Y. 2019-20.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. It is engaged in the business of rendering financial intermediation services. The Return of Income for the A.Y.2019-20 was filed on 04.10.2019. The said return was processed u/s.143(1) vide intimation dated 18.12.2019 raising demand of Rs.2,54,453/- u/s.234C of the Act. Against the same, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) raising additional ground of appeal challenging the levy of interest u/s.234C of the Act and also seeking benefit of cost of indexation while computing the capital gains arising on account of sale of unlisted shares. The CIT(A) allowed the ground relating to levy of interest u/s.234C of the Act, however, dismissed the ground seeking relief of the benefit of cost of indexation while computing the capital gains.

3.

Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.

4.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee had offered the capital gains in the return of income on sale of unlisted shares, without claiming cost of indexation. The CPC while processing the return of income u/s.143(1) cannot travel beyond the return of income and the accompanying documents. It is only before the CIT(A) for the first time the assessee sought the benefit of cost of indexation while computing the capital gains on sale of unlisted shares. The CIT(A) cannot do what the CPC itself cannot do. No fresh claim can be entertained in the proceedings post the processing of the return of income u/s.143(1) of the Act. Thus, the CIT(A) had rightly rejected the claim of the appellant. We do not find any merit in the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 26th day of July, 2024.

More judgments on Section 234C

All 6,043 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →