GABRIEL INDIA LIMITED, 29TH MILESTONE V. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5(1)(1), Mumbai, Circle 5(1)(1), Mumbai

MA 320/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Gabriel India Ltd., which filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking rectification of an earlier Tribunal order that mistakenly classified a subsidy received under the PSI/2007 scheme as a revenue receipt instead of a capital receipt. The Tribunal acknowledged the error as inadvertent and corrected the classification to capital receipt, aligning it with the precedent set by a Co-ordinate Bench decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123658 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: PSI/2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRABHADRA S. MAHAJAN
• Keywords: Capital receipt

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) M.A. No. 320/MUM/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 185/MUM/2022) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gabriel India Ltd., 29 th Milestone, Pune Nashik Highway, Village Kuruli, Pune, Maharashtra-410501 Vs. The DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), 568, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACG 1994 N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Viral Shah Revenue by : Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, AR Date of Hearing : 23/06/2023 Date of pronouncement : 30/06/2023 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM By way of this Miscellaneous Application, the assessee sought for rectification/recall of the order of the Tribunal dated 31.10.2022 in ITA No. 185/Mum/2022 for assessment year 2014-15. 2. We have heard rival submission of the parties in the issue in dispute. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that Tribunal in para 11 has deleted the addition following the Co-ordinate Bench decision deleting the subsidy received under PSI/2007 as capital receipt however inadvertently it was mentioned as Revenue receipt in para 11. In our opinion this being an inadverte therefore, same is rectified be read as capital receipt. 3. The Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed with above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/ (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30/06/2023 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// receipt however inadvertently it was mentioned as Revenue receipt in para 11. In our opinion this being an inadverte therefore, same is rectified and the subsidy under PSI/2007 should be read as capital receipt. The Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed with nounced in the open Court on 30/06/2023. Sd/- Sd/ SINGH KARHAIL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Gabriel India Ltd. 2 M.A No. 320/Mum/2023 receipt however inadvertently it was mentioned as Revenue receipt in para 11. In our opinion this being an inadvertent mistake and and the subsidy under PSI/2007 should The Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed with /06/2023. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai