GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ,MUMBAI V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-NFAC, MUMBAI

ITA 2650/MUM/2024

AI Insights

GTL Infrastructure Limited appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which upheld the AO's decision not to grant depreciation on certain assets acquired through business transfer agreements. The depreciation claimed was substantial, amounting to Rs. 1,36,78,87,844. The Tribunal noted that although the depreciation was not claimed in the return of income for the year under consideration, the assessee had previously claimed it from AY 2011-12 to 2017-18 and had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme to resolve disputes over disallowances and consequential additions. The Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the AO for a comprehensive review in light of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and all pertinent facts from AY 2011-12 onwards.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28560 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KISHOR DHULE; DR
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH THAR; KRUPA GANDHI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Revised return; Depreciation
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

" | आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण \fा यपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2650/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 GTL Infrastructure Limited 3rd Floor, Global Vision Electronic Sadan 2 TTC Industrial Area, MIDC, Mahape Navi Mumbai Thane - 400710 [PAN: AACCG2107K] Vs Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals), NFAC अपीला थ\u0016/ (Appellant) \u0017\u0018 यथ\u0016/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Ms. Krupa Gandhi & Ms. Bhavya Jain, A/Rs Revenue by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 19/03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 19/03/2024 by the NFAC, Delhi, [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’], pertaining to AY 2021-22. 2. The grievance of the assessee reads as under:- “GROUND NO. I: NON-GRANT OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.1,36,78,87,844/- CLAIMED IN THE ASSESSMENT PORCEEDINGS: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the decision of the Ld.AO in not granting deduction of depreciation of Rs. 1,36,78,87,844/- on the assets of the tower undertaking acquired by the Appellant pursuant to the business transfer agreement from Aircel Group. 2. The Appellant prays that it be granted the entire depreciation of Rs. 1,36,78,87,844/- claimed during the assessment proceedings. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. I. I.T.A. No. 2650/Mum/2024 2 GROUND NO. H: NON-GRANT OF DEPREICIATION ON TOWER BUSINESS ASSETS OF THE ERSTWHILE CHENNAI NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ACQUIRED UNDER THE BUSINESS TRANSFER AGREEMENT : 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in not granting depreciation of Rs. 1,36,78,87,844/- on tower business assets of the erstwhile Chennai Network Infrastructure Ltd. 2. The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant depreciation of Rs. 1,36,78,87,844/-. GROUND NO. Ill: INTEREST U/S.234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT: 1. On the facts and circumstances and in the law, Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the decision of the Ld. AO in charging interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 2. The Appellant prays that the interest chargeable under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act be accordingly corrected/reduced. GENERAL The Appellant Company craves leave to add, alter and/or amend or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee relates to the claim of depreciation made by the assessee which was not made by the assessee in the return of income filed by it for the year under consideration. 4. The peculiar underlying facts in the issue dates back to AY 2011- 12, when the impugned claim of depreciation was first made by the assessee. The claim was made from AY 2011-12 to 2017-18 and to buy peace and to avoid litigations, the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme relating to disallowance/addition of consequential depreciation. However, in the year under consideration, though no such claim was made in the return of income, however, by way of a letter, the assessee requested that the depreciation deserves to be granted even if no claim was made by the assessee in its return of income submitted for the I.T.A. No. 2650/Mum/2024 3 captioned assessment year. The AO did not entertain the claim of the assessee as the same was not claimed in the return of income drawing support from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). 5. When the claim of the assessee was reiterated before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) was of the view that the Hon’ble Apex Court (supra) held that the claim of deduction not made in the return cannot be entertained by the AO otherwise than by filing a revised return. 6. We are of the considered view that the claim of depreciation should be considered after considering all the underlying facts of the issue right from AY 2011-12 onwards and the settlement under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme read with the relevant provision of Vivad Se Vishwas Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit to restore the entire quarrel to the file of the AO. The AO is directed to decide the claim of the assessee after considering all the related facts starting from AY 2011-12 and after considering the relevant provisions of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 19th March, 2025 at Mumbai. Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) VICE-PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 19/03/2025 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs I.T.A. No. 2650/Mum/2024 4 आदेश की \u0015ितिलिप अ\u001aेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u001c / The Appellant 2. \u0015\u001dथ\u001c / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु\" ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \u0015ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड& फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Mumbai "