DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 41(4)(1), MUMBI, MUMBAI V. ARYAN INVESTMENTS, MUMBAI

MA 64/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application by the Revenue against the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, which had dismissed the Revenue's appeal without adjudicating the grounds of appeal. The Revenue contended that the Co-ordinate Bench had not considered their grounds regarding the inflation of book profits for making enhanced claims of remuneration to partners. However, the Tribunal found that the Co-ordinate Bench had indeed addressed these grounds, stating that the amount credited to the Profit and Loss account for diminution in the value of investment had already been reduced while computing the book profit, and thus, no double reduction was necessary.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708400 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: Ram Baburao Salve vs. Assessing Officer [2024] 162 taxmann.com 354 (Bombay)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAN KOSURI
• Assessee Lawyers: SHOBIT MISHRA
• Keywords: Period of limitation

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 64/Mum/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 05/Mum/2024) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-41(4)(1), Room No. 425, Kautilya Bhavan, G Block, BKC, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 vs. Aryan Investments, Opp: Kalpateru Estate, JVL Road, Jogeshwari East, Mumbai-400060 PAN : AARFA5365M (Applicant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shobit Mishra For Revenue : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 04-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16-07-2025 O R D E R This is a Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue against the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 05/Mum/2024, dt. 09-07-2024. 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that there is a delay in filing the Miscellaneous Application by the Revenue and even the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 40 days in filing the subject Miscellaneous Application. In this regard, the Ld.AR has submitted that under the provisions of section 254(2) of the Act, the Tribunal does not have the powers to condone the delay in filing the Miscellaneous Application and has drawn our reference to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ram Baburao Salve vs. Assessing Officer [2024] 162 taxmann.com 354 (Bombay). 2 M.A. No. 64/Mum/2025 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that though the order of the Tribunal was dated 09-07-2024, however, the same was received in the office of the Pr.CIT-17, Mumbai on 11-11-2024 and if the period of limitation u/s 254(2) is counted from the said date of communication, there is no delay in filing the present Miscellaneous Application which was filed on 12-03-2025. 4. After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on record, I find that there is no delay in filing the present Miscellaneous Application and hence, the Miscellaneous Application is taken up for adjudication. 5. As per the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue, the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, without adjudicating the grounds of appeal so taken by the Revenue in its appeal filed before the Tribunal. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. I find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has dealt with the grounds so taken by the Revenue relating to inflation of book profits for the purposes of making enhanced claim of remuneration to partners and its findings are contained in paragraph No. 6 of its order, which reads as under: “We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The brief controversy in this appeal is that while calculating book profit whether the amount credited by the assessee to the Profit and Loss account of ₹4,98,70,180 on account of diminution in the value of investment is required to be considered as part of book profit or not. Looking into the computation of total income, The assessee has already reduced the above amount while computing the book profit and after that the book profit was computed at ₹73,13,927/-. Therefore, once again reducing the same would amount to double reduction of book profit. The computation of total income reproduced by the assessee in answer to letter dated 25th march, 2022, reproduced at Para no.7 of the assessment order clearly shows the same. Therefore, 3 M.A. No. 64/Mum/2025 we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT (A) and both the grounds of appeal of the learned Assessing Officer are dismissed.” 7. I, therefore, find that the Co-ordinate Bench has recorded its specific findings disposing off the grounds of appeal so taken by the Revenue. I, therefore, do not find any basis as alleged in the Miscellaneous Application so filed by the Revenue that the Co-ordinate Bench has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal so taken by the Revenue. 8. In the result, the Miscellaneous application so filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16-07-2025 Sd/- [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 16-07-2025 TNMM Copy to : 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The D.R. ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Dy./Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai "