National Aluminium Company Limited, Bhubaneswar V. ACIT, Corporate Circle- 1(2), Bhubaneswar

MA 5/CTK/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3178 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2022
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SATYAJIT MISHRA

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM Miscellaneous Application No.05/CTK/2021 (Arising out of IT A No.01/CTK/2020) (नििाारण वषा / AYs. :2016-2017) National Aluminium Company Limited, NALCO Bhawan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Vs ACIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar PAN No. : AAACN 7449 M (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Satyajit Mishra, AR िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR स ु नवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 19/08/2022 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement : 19/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: This miscellaneous application is filed by the assessee against the consolidated order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No.01/CTK/2020, dated 28.10.2020. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee has been compelled to file this Miscellaneous Application because the AO while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal refused to reduce the credit in respect of provisions for leave encashment, which is to be reduced from the income. It was the submission that the Tribunal has categorically given a decision that if there is any provision in respect of leave encashment, the same is to be disallowed and the same is to be allowed on actual payment. It was the submission that obviously the corollary was MA Nos.05/CTK/2021 2 that if that was credit the same has been reduced from the income. It was the submission that when this was mentioned to the AO the AO had stated that there is no specific finding in the order of the Tribunal in respect of the credit to the provision which is to be reduced. 3. When it was requested to the ld. Sr. DR, during the course of hearing, to verify with the AO as to whether such a statement has been made and whether such was the stand of the AO, the ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has filed a rectification application and decision on that will be taken accordingly. 4. Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee has submitted that the rectification is not in regard to the issue of the credit to the provision for leave encashment. The rectification was in regard to the wrong calculation done by the AO in respect of disallowance of the provision for leave encashment and the actual allowance on the basis of the actual payment. The stand of the ld. Sr. DR being that he is not willing to even discuss the issue with the concerned AO and the fact that the AO has refused to consider the issue to its logical end clearly shows that there is something wrong with the functioning at the AO’s level which needs to be addressed seriously. For the purpose of clarity and for the purpose of categorical direction, it is directed that the AO while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal shall reduce the credit to the provision for leave encashment from the total income as determined by him in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year under consideration. Copy of the order may be sent to the ld. CCIT for information. MA Nos.05/CTK/2021 3 5. Ld. AR also pointed that in page 67 para 74, 5 th line, the assessment year is wrongly mentioned as 2015-2016 whereas the same should be corrected as assessment year 2016-2017. The ld. Sr. DR also accepted that this is a mistake. 6. As this is a typographical error of assessment year mentioned in 5 th line of para 74 of page 67 of the order, therefore, the same is corrected and be read as assessment year 2016-2017. Thus, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced and dictated in the open court on 19/08/2022. Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 19/08/2022 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशाि ु सार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack 1. अऩीलाथी / The Appellant- National Aluminium Company Limited, NALCO Bhawan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- ACIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar 3. आयकि आय ु क्त(अऩील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकि आय ु क्त / CIT 5. ववभागीय प्रनतननधध, आयकि अऩीलीय अधधकिण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ा पाईल / Guard file. सत्यावऩत प्रनत //True Copy//