ACIT,CIRCLE-14(1)(1), MUMBAI V. M/S MAHARASHTRA STATE POWER GENERATION COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 2752/MUM/2022

AI Insights

The case involves the Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, which contested the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding prior period expenses amounting to INR 5,14,18,327 for the assessment year 2014-15. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) had earlier deleted these additions, leading to an appeal by the Revenue. The Tribunal heard arguments from both sides, reviewed submissions, and previous judicial decisions, and decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a detailed examination of the claims and supporting evidence regarding the crystallization of the expenses during the relevant financial year. Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the issue of interest levied under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C, directing a re-evaluation post-verification of the advance tax payment by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123345 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 11-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. vs. ITA No. 4440/M/2015, Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. vs. ITA No. 3634/M/2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3); 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No. 2752/MUM/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 ACIT, Circle-14(1)(1), Room No. 432, 4 th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Vs. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, Plot No. G9, Prakshgad, 2 nd floor, Anant Kanekar Marg, Station Road, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AAECM 2935 R Appellant Respondent CO No. 153/MUM/2022 (Arising out of ITA No. 2752/MUM/2022) Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, Plot No. G9, Prakshgad, 2 nd floor, Anant Kanekar Marg, Station Road, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Vs. ACIT, Circle-14(1)(1), Room No. 432, 4 th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAECM 2935 R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Niraj Sheth, AR Revenue by : Smt. Mahita Nair, DR Date of Hearing : 12/01/2023 Date of pronouncement : 19/01/2023 PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue and cross assessee are directed against order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014 Revenue is reproduced as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO of ₹ expenses merely relying on the submissions made by the AR of the assessee and on the basis of various judicial decisions made by the courts without considering the genuine fact of the case. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee in cross reproduced as under: 1. The appellant submits that, in case it is held that the prior period expenditure of allowed then the prior period income of ₹1,64,78,59,865/ account too should not be taxed logic/rationale as is applied for disallowance of the prior period expenditure. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the assessee are directed against order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15 respectively. The ground raised by the Revenue is reproduced as under: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the ₹5,14,18,327/- on account of prior period nses merely relying on the submissions made by the AR of the assessee and on the basis of various judicial decisions made by the courts without considering the genuine fact of the case. The grounds raised by the assessee in cross reproduced as under: The appellant submits that, in case it is held that the prior period expenditure of ₹5,14,18,327/- are not to be allowed then the prior period income of 1,64,78,59,865/- credited to the profit and loss account too should not be taxed following the same logic/rationale as is applied for disallowance of the prior period expenditure. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 2 objection by the assessee are directed against order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for 15 respectively. The ground raised by the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the on account of prior period nses merely relying on the submissions made by the AR of the assessee and on the basis of various judicial decisions made by the courts without The grounds raised by the assessee in cross-objection are The appellant submits that, in case it is held that the are not to be allowed then the prior period income of credited to the profit and loss following the same logic/rationale as is applied for disallowance of the 2. In case it is held that the prior period expenditure are not to be allowed for the captioned assessment year then the Assessing Officer be directed to allow expenses for the earlier year(s) to which they pertain to. 2.1 Further, the assessee has also raised additional cross objection, which is reproduced as under: 1. The respondent submits that levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Inco Act, 1961 is bad in law and the Commissioner of Income such. 3. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee, a public sector undertaking of the state of Maharashtra year under consideration was engaged in the business of generation of electricity. The assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration on 27.11.2014 declaring net loss of ₹714,84,163,368/-. The return of income filed b selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the Income Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 30.12.2016 after making disallowance including prior per ₹514,18,327/-. In the demand notice interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act were also levied. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 In case it is held that the prior period expenditure are not to be allowed for the captioned assessment year then the Assessing Officer be directed to allow expenses for the earlier year(s) to which they pertain to. Further, the assessee has also raised additional cross objection, which is reproduced as under: The respondent submits that levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Inco Act, 1961 is bad in law and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-NFAC ought to have held as Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee, a public sector undertaking of the state of Maharashtra, during the relevant year under consideration was engaged in the business of generation of electricity. The assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration on 27.11.2014 declaring net loss of . The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the Income Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 30.12.2016 after making disallowance including prior period expenses of . In the demand notice interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act were also levied. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 3 In case it is held that the prior period expenditure are not to be allowed for the captioned assessment year then the Assessing Officer be directed to allow the expenses for the earlier year(s) to which they pertain to. Further, the assessee has also raised additional cross- The respondent submits that levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and the Commissioner of NFAC ought to have held as Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee, a public during the relevant year under consideration was engaged in the business of generation of electricity. The assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration on 27.11.2014 declaring net loss of y the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 30.12.2016 iod expenses of . In the demand notice interest u/s 234A, 234B, 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but could succeed partly. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is by way of appeal whereas, the assessee is by way of cross-objection as reproduced above. 5. In the ground raised by the Revenue in its appeal, the sole issue is regarding deleting the addition made by the AO of ₹514,18,327/- on account of prio 6. We have heard rival submissions of the parties on the issue in-dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that prior period expenses were of the routine nature of the were deleted because of procedure administrative reasons. The assessee provided detailed breakup of prior period income/ex reference, the said details is reproduced a “2. The detailed breakup of the prior period income/expenditure is given hereunder for your Honour’s ready reference : Other Income Other excess provisions in prior periods Coal/Gas related (Excess)/short provision for depreciation In the consolidated order dated 22nd April 2021 the appeal in ITA No. 4440/M/2015 pertains to ‘Maharashtra State Power M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but could succeed partly. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is by way of appeal whereas, the assessee is by way of objection as reproduced above. In the ground raised by the Revenue in its appeal, the sole issue is regarding deleting the addition made by the AO of on account of prior period expenses. We have heard rival submissions of the parties on the issue dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that prior period expenses were of the routine nature of the business and payments were deleted because of procedure delay and due administrative reasons. The assessee provided detailed breakup of prior period income/expenditure before the Ld. CIT(A). the said details is reproduced as under: The detailed breakup of the prior period income/expenditure is given hereunder for your Honour’s ready reference : Particulars Amount in 4,78,01,845 Other excess provisions in prior periods 1,42,14,32,383 Coal/Gas related gain -- (Excess)/short provision for depreciation 5,53,80,107 In the consolidated order dated 22nd April 2021 the appeal in ITA No. 4440/M/2015 pertains to ‘Maharashtra State Power M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 4 Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but could succeed partly. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is by way of appeal whereas, the assessee is by way of In the ground raised by the Revenue in its appeal, the sole issue is regarding deleting the addition made by the AO of We have heard rival submissions of the parties on the issue- dispute and perused the relevant material on record. Before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that prior period business and payments and due to various administrative reasons. The assessee provided detailed breakup of penditure before the Ld. CIT(A). For ready The detailed breakup of the prior period income/expenditure is given hereunder for your Honour’s Amount in ₹ 4,78,01,845 1,42,14,32,383 5,53,80,107 In the consolidated order dated 22nd April 2021 the appeal in ITA No. 4440/M/2015 pertains to ‘Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.’ and ITA No. 3634/M/2017 pertains to ‘Maharashtra St however, in the said order of the ITAT only the name of ‘Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.’ has been erroneously mentioned against both the appeal numbers. 3. Receipts from consumers [A] Expenses Fuel related (gains/losses) Net interest and finance charges Operating expenses Employee costs Excess in billing of earlier years Material related expenses [B] Prior period (credits)/charges (Net (B During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had inter why the prior period expenses amounting to should not be disallowed while arriving at its normal profits. 6.1 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee held as under: “I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the observations of the AO, submissions of the appe material available on record on the above matter. During the year under considerationappellant has shown prior period income of Rs 1,64,78,59,865 and prior period expense of Rs 5,14,18,327/ M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 Generation Co. Ltd.’ and ITA No. 3634/M/2017 pertains to ‘Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd.’ however, in the said order of the ITAT only the name of ‘Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.’ has been erroneously mentioned against both the appeal numbers. Receipts from consumers 12,32,45,530 1,64,78,59,865 Fuel related (gains/losses) 2,09,24,739 Net interest and finance charges - Operating expenses 1,36,94,209 Employee costs 9,00,177 Excess in billing of earlier years 1,18,43,904 Material related expenses 40,55,298 5,14,18,327 Prior period (credits)/charges (Net (B-A) 1,59,64,41,538 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had inter-alia called upon the Appellant to explain as to why the prior period expenses amounting to ₹5,14,18,538/ ould not be disallowed while arriving at its normal profits. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee held as under: I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, observations of the AO, submissions of the appe material available on record on the above matter. During the year under considerationappellant has shown prior period income of Rs 1,64,78,59,865 and prior period expense of Rs 5,14,18,327/-. AO accepted the income and disallowed the M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 5 Generation Co. Ltd.’ and ITA No. 3634/M/2017 pertains to ate Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd.’ – however, in the said order of the ITAT only the name of ‘Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.’ has been erroneously mentioned against both the appeal numbers. 12,32,45,530 1,64,78,59,865 2,09,24,739 1,36,94,209 9,00,177 1,18,43,904 40,55,298 5,14,18,327 1,59,64,41,538 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing alia called upon the Appellant to explain as to ₹5,14,18,538/- ould not be disallowed while arriving at its normal profits. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, observations of the AO, submissions of the appellant and material available on record on the above matter. During the year under considerationappellant has shown prior period income of Rs 1,64,78,59,865 and prior period expense of Rs . AO accepted the income and disallowed the prior period expenses of Rs 5,14, 18,327/ do not provide for claim of any prior period expenses. Appellant claims that the same should be allowed as the expenditure has crystallized during the year under consideration. This is recurring issue in appellant and the same has been decided in the favour of the appellant by the Hon'ble Mumbai TAT Bench. Appellant has submitted the copy of Hon'ble ITAT order ITA No 1394/MUM/2015 for AY for AY 2011 3634/Mum/2017 for AY 2012 for AY 2001- ITA No. 1648/Mum/2010 for AY 2003 Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co Ltd. Thus in view of the above, Mumbai 'B" Bench, I hereby allow the claim of prior period expenses. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal No 2 to 2.3 of the appellant are hereby allowed. 6.2 We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition o reasoning that the expenditure in question had crystallized during the year under consideration. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee was asked to explain as how the relevant expenses have crystallized during the ye consideration. However, he could not file any documents or evidence in support of the claim that expenses crystallized during the year under consideration. In view of above facts, the reasoning M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 expenses of Rs 5,14, 18,327/- stating that the Act do not provide for claim of any prior period expenses. Appellant claims that the same should be allowed as the expenditure has crystallized during the year under consideration. This is recurring issue in the case of the appellant and the same has been decided in the favour of the appellant by the Hon'ble Mumbai TAT Bench. Appellant has submitted the copy of Hon'ble ITAT order ITA No 1394/MUM/2015 for AY 2010-11,ITA No 4440/Mum/2015 for AY 2011-12 in appellant case and ITA No 3634/Mum/2017 for AY 2012-13. ITA-No 3813/Mum/2009 -02, ITA No 1647/Mum/2010 for AY 2002 ITA No. 1648/Mum/2010 for AY 2003-04 in the case of Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co Ltd. Thus in view of the above, following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai 'B" Bench, I hereby allow the claim of prior period expenses. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal No 2 to 2.3 of the appellant are hereby allowed.” We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition o reasoning that the expenditure in question had crystallized during the year under consideration. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee was asked to explain as how the relevant expenses have crystallized during the ye consideration. However, he could not file any documents or evidence in support of the claim that expenses crystallized during the year under consideration. In view of above facts, the reasoning M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 6 stating that the Act do not provide for claim of any prior period expenses. Appellant claims that the same should be allowed as the expenditure has crystallized during the year under the case of the appellant and the same has been decided in the favour of the appellant by the Hon'ble Mumbai TAT Bench. Appellant has submitted the copy of Hon'ble ITAT order ITA No 11,ITA No 4440/Mum/2015 ant case and ITA No No 3813/Mum/2009 No 1647/Mum/2010 for AY 2002-03 and 04 in the case of Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co Ltd. Thus in following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai 'B" Bench, I hereby allow the claim of prior period expenses. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal No 2 to 2.3 of We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition on the reasoning that the expenditure in question had crystallized during the year under consideration. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee was asked to explain as how the relevant expenses have crystallized during the year under consideration. However, he could not file any documents or evidence in support of the claim that expenses crystallized during the year under consideration. In view of above facts, the reasoning given by the Ld. CIT(A) for deleting the addition for expenditure cannot be accepted finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding afresh with the liberty to the assessee to produce all the necessary evi claim that prior period expenses under reference were crystallized during the year under consideration. The ground of appeal of the Revenue is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the additional cross assessee raised the issue of levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 8. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue dispute, we find that the assessee was aggrieved for n credit of advance tax amounting to Ld. CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee and allow the credit accordingly. The relevant finding of Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: “6.2 I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the appellant and material available on record on the above matter. Appellant has claimed that it has not been granted the Advance tax payment credit of Rs 1,62,00,00,000/ reflecting the payment made. In view of the above AO is directed to verify the contentions of the appellant and if it is M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 given by the Ld. CIT(A) for deleting the addition for expenditure cannot be accepted. Accordingly, we set aside the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding afresh with the liberty to the assessee to produce all the necessary evidence in support of its claim that prior period expenses under reference were crystallized during the year under consideration. The ground of appeal of the Revenue is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. In the additional cross-objection, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee raised the issue of levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue dispute, we find that the assessee was aggrieved for n credit of advance tax amounting to ₹162 crores. In this respect, the Ld. CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee and allow the credit accordingly. The relevant finding of Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the appellant and material available on record on the above matter. Appellant has claimed that it has not been granted the Advance tax payment credit of Rs 1,62,00,00,000/-. Appellant has submitted copy of challan reflecting the payment made. In view of the above AO is directed to verify the contentions of the appellant and if it is M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 7 given by the Ld. CIT(A) for deleting the addition for prior period we set aside the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding afresh with the liberty to the dence in support of its claim that prior period expenses under reference were crystallized during the year under consideration. The ground of appeal of the Revenue is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. objection, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee raised the issue of levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B and On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue-in- dispute, we find that the assessee was aggrieved for not granting 162 crores. In this respect, the Ld. CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee and allow the credit accordingly. The relevant finding I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the appellant and material available on record on the above matter. Appellant has claimed that it has not been granted the Advance tax payment credit of Rs ellant has submitted copy of challan reflecting the payment made. In view of the above AO is directed to verify the contentions of the appellant and if it is found that credit has not been given for advance tax paid, the same may be rectified. The ground o hereby allowed subject to verification by AO 8.1 Due to non-grant of credit for advance tax of Assessing Officer has computed interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The assessee filed an application for rectifica interest before the Assessing Officer. However, same has been stated to be pending. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to recalculate interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In our opinion, the computation of t allowed after verification of due payment by the assessee and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to verify the said issue. We find that application of the assessee seeking rectification on this issue before the AO. In the circumstances, we feel it appropriate to direct the Assessing Officer to comply with the direction of the Ld. CIT(A) if the rectification application of the assessee has not been disposed off by him. The ground raised in additional cross assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 9. Since, the ground raised are connected with the issue of prior period expenses which we have already restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and therefore, no separate adjudication required that ground of cross objection are also allowed for statistical purposes. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 found that credit has not been given for advance tax paid, the same may be rectified. The ground of appeal no 3 to 3.3 are hereby allowed subject to verification by AO.” grant of credit for advance tax of ₹ Assessing Officer has computed interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The assessee filed an application for rectification of the said interest before the Assessing Officer. However, same has been stated to be pending. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to recalculate interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In our opinion, the computation of the interest has to be allowed after verification of due payment by the assessee and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to verify the said issue. We find that application of the assessee seeking rectification on this issue is also been stated to be pending before the AO. In the circumstances, we feel it appropriate to direct the Assessing Officer to comply with the direction of the Ld. CIT(A) if the rectification application of the assessee has not been disposed The ground raised in additional cross- assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. Since, the ground raised in the cross-objection are connected with the issue of prior period expenses which we restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and therefore, no separate adjudication required that ground of cross objection are also allowed for statistical purposes. M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 8 found that credit has not been given for advance tax paid, the f appeal no 3 to 3.3 are ₹162 crores, the Assessing Officer has computed interest u/s 234B and 234C of the tion of the said interest before the Assessing Officer. However, same has been stated to be pending. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to recalculate interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C he interest has to be allowed after verification of due payment by the assessee and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly directed the Assessing Officer to verify the said issue. We find that application of the assessee is also been stated to be pending before the AO. In the circumstances, we feel it appropriate to direct the Assessing Officer to comply with the direction of the Ld. CIT(A) if the rectification application of the assessee has not been disposed objection of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. objection by the assessee are connected with the issue of prior period expenses which we restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and therefore, no separate adjudication required that ground of cross- 10. In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules, 1963 on 19/01/2023 Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated:19/01/2023 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules, 01/2023. Sd/- SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai M/s Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited ITA No. 2752 & CO No. 153/Mum/2022 9 In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross- are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules, - OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Mumbai