UNISTAR BIOTECH LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 27(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 5052/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's sole substantive issue was that the disallowance amount was already included in their computation and had gone un-rebutted by the Revenue. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the ground to the Assessing Officer to ensure no double disallowance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from a CIT(A) order confirming a disallowance of Rs.7,76,499 under section 40A(7) for gratuity provision. The assessee contended that this amount was not claimed as a deduction and was already disallowed in the computation, arguing it was a clerical error.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming a disallowance when the amount was already accounted for and disallowed in the computation, and if it constitutes a clerical error.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40A(7),Section 36(1)(v),Section 36(1)(va),Section 154,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 23.09.2025Pronounced: 23.09.2025

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077779461(1) dated 25.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

The assessee hereby pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.7,76,499 under section 40A(7) in respect of provision for gratuity, despite the fact that the said amount was not claimed as deduction and was already disallowed in the computation.

2.

That the CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the error in classification between s

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 40A(7)

All 268 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40A(7) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →