ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI V. ACC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 7578/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9105 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA No. 7578/Mum/2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI A BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Pavan Kumar Gadale (Judicial Member)] ITA No. 7578/Mum/2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai ...............................Appellant Vs. ACC Limited ..............................Respondent Cement House, 121, M.K Road, Mumbai 400 020 [PAN:AAACT1507C] Appearances by: Yogesh Thar along with Chaitanya D. Joshi & Sukanya Jayaram for the appellant Shailja Rai along with Manoj Sinha for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 08/08/2022 Date of pronouncing the order : 08/08/2022 ORAL ORDER (Dictated in the open court) Per Pramod Kumar VP 1. By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 25.09.2013, passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of order given effect to the CIT(A)’s order in the matter of assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. Grievance raised by the Assessing Officer is as follow:- On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing to delete the addition made by AO on unutilized modvat credit referable to closing stock based on ITA No. 7578/Mum/2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Page 2 of 2 CIT(A)’s order dated 12.09.2011 without appreciating the facts that relief was given on net addition of Rs. 7,41,62,393/- . 3. When this appeal came up for hearing Shri Yogesh Thar, learned counsel for the assessee fairly accepted that he has to concede the point inasmuch as while the disputed addition for only in respect of the difference between opening stock and closing stock, but the learned CIT(A) inadvertently has given relief in respect of the entire closing stock. The learned Departmental Representative obviously does not oppose the stand of the assessee. 4. In view of the above discussions and as agreed to the parties the impugned relief granted by the learned CIT(A) stands vacated and the appellant succeeds on this issues. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Pronouncement and dictated in the open court today on the 08 th August, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- Pavan Kumar Gadale Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Vice President) Mumbai, dated the 08 th August, 2022 Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) Guard File By order True Copy Assistant Registrar/ Sr. PS Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai benches, Mumbai