IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MP No.26/Bang/2022 [in IT(TP)A No. 693/Bang/2017] Assessment year : 2012-13 M/s. TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., TE Park, 22B, Doddenakundi Corporation, 2 nd Phase, Industrial Area, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru – 560 048. PAN: AABCT 7374C Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, LTU, Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sumeet Khurana, CA Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 29.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29.04.2022 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member By this miscellaneous petition, the assessee wants to rectify the order of the Tribunal dated 25.11.2021 in IT(TP)A No.693/Bang/2017. 2. The first ground is non-adjudication of Ground No.12A which reads as follows:- “12A. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer (‘AO’) and Dispute Resolution Panel (‘DRP’) ought to grant deduction for Education MP No.26/Bang/2022 Page 2 of 3 Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess (collectively referred to as ‘Cess’) paid by the Appellant while arriving at the assessed income for the year under appeal (Additional Ground No.12A filed on September 111, 2020, pending admittance).” 3. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has not pressed this issue. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 4. The next ground is non-adjudication of Ground 9A which reads as follows:- “9A. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO ought not to have assessed rather exclude from the taxable income, an amount of INR 17,23,56,278 being reversal of provision during the current year, owing to the fact that no deduction was claimed during the preceding year wherein the said provision was created. (Additional Ground No.9A filed on September 111, 2020, pending admittance).”” 5. The ld. AR submitted that this ground was inadvertently unadjudicated by the Tribunal. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. This is an additional ground. The assessee explained the reason for not raising this ground on earlier occasion. In our opinion, there is good and sufficient reason for not raising this ground earlier. Accordingly, this ground is admitted by placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC). 6. After admitting the additional ground, we are inclined to remit this issue to the file of DRP to consider the same in accordance with law. 7. The next ground is contradiction in adjudication of ground No.11, This ground is adjudicated in para 20 of the Tribunal’s order by remitting the issue to the AO for fresh consideration. However, there is an MP No.26/Bang/2022 Page 3 of 3 inadvertent mistake. Accordingly, para 20 of the order is modified to read as follows:- “20. The assessee has to file supporting documents and AO has to reconsider the issue. Accordingly, the issue is remitted to the AO for fresh consideration.” 8. In the result, the MP filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Pronounced in the open court on this 29 th day of April, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- ( N V VASUDEVAN ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bangalore, Dated, the 29 th April, 2022. /Desai S Murthy / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore.