M/S INDOFIL INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT, CIRCLE (A)-10(1)(1), MUMBAI

MA 486/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4741 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 05-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “C” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Kuldip Singh (JM) M.A. No. 486/Mum/2023 in I.T.A. No. 2292/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2014-15) M.A. No. 487/Mum/2023 in I.T.A. No. 2293/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2015-16) M.A. No. 488/Mum/2023 in I.T.A. No. 2294/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2016-17) Indofil Industries Limited 4 th Floor, Kalpataru Square Kondivita Road, Off Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East Mumbai-400 059. PAN : AABCI4568D Vs. ACIT Circle 10(1)(1) Mumba. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Krupa Gandhi Department by Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Date of Hearing 06.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 11.12.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed these Miscellaneous Applications submitting that there is a mistake apparent from record in the common order dated 30.1.2023 passed by the Tribunal for A.Y. 2014-15 to 2016-17 in the appeals filed by the assessee referred to in the caption. 2. The assessee has submitted in the petition that it had raised a ground challenging the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of difference between the receipts/income accounted in the books of account and that was shown in Form No. 26AS. The AO had made the similar Indofil Industries Limited 2 addition in all the three years and the same was confirmed by Ld CIT(A). It is submitted that the Tribunal has not adjudicated the above said ground, even though the same was argued at the time of hearing. Accordingly, it is submitted that non-adjudication of the above said ground in all the three years constitutes mistake apparent from record. Accordingly, it is prayed that the above said mistake may be rectified. 3. The Learned DR also accepted the factual position mentioned above. Accordingly, we proceed to dispose of the said common ground in all the three years by inserting following paragraphs in the impugned common order dated 30-01-2023:- “9) The next issue urged by the assessee in all the three years relate to the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of difference between the receipts/income shown in the books of account and in Form No. 26AS. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee has accounted the said difference in the succeeding year, while payer has reported the same during the current year and the same has resulted in difference. The said difference was assessed by the AO, since the assessee could not reconcile the difference at that point of time. The Learned AR submitted that the addition made by the AO has resulted in double taxation of same income, which is not permitted under the Income tax Act. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee may be provided with an opportunity to present reconciliation statement before the AO. 10) We heard learned DR on this issue and perused the record. There should not be any dispute that double assessment of the same income is not permitted under the Income Tax Act. Any income can be assessed in the year in which the same is taxable as per the method of accounting followed by the assessee. It is the submission of the assessee that the difference amount in income noted by the AO has actually been offered Indofil Industries Limited 3 in the succeeding year. It was also submitted that the assessee may be provided with an opportunity to reconcile the said difference in all the three years, so that double taxation of same income is avoided. In view of the above prayer, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case before the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue in all the three years under consideration and restore them to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining them afresh duly considering the reconciliation statement that may be furnished by the assessee. We also direct the Assessing Officer to ensure that there is no double assessment of the same income. After providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the AO may take appropriate decision in accordance with law in all the three years under consideration” 3. The existing paragraph no.9 shall be renumbered as paragraph no. 11. 4. In the result, all the three Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 11.12.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Kuldip Singh) (B.R. Baskaran) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai.; Dated : 11/12/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai. Indofil Industries Limited 4 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai