TCS e- SERVE LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS e- SERVE INTERNATIONAL LTD), MUMBAI V. THE ADDL.CIT.RANGE-9(1), MUMBAI

MA 542/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5635 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 02-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-09-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 3 BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘H’ MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM MA NUMBER 542/M/2023 IN ITA NUMBER 2540/MUL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 – 06 Tata consultancy services limited, Ninth floor, Nirmal building , Nariman point, Mumbai – 21 ..... Applicant Vs The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, range 9 (1), Ayakar bhavan, Maharishikarveroad, Mumbai 20 ............... Respondent Applicant represented by :- Mr Neeraj Sheth ,advocate Respondent represented by:- Mr. Anil Sant Senior Departmental Representative Heard on 3 November 2023 Pronounced on 3 November 2023 Per Prashant Maharishi AM 1. This Miscellaneous Application is filed by Tata consultancy services Limited (the assessee/applicant/appellant) for assessment year 2005 – 06 in ITA number 2540/M/2011 wherein it is pointed out that in paragraph number 21 of the order there are certain errors Page 2 of 3 which are apparent and therefore needs to be corrected. Assessee further states that there are certain typographical errors which needs to be corrected. 2. After hearing the parties, on careful perusal of the order of the coordinate bench, we find that there is an error in paragraph number 21 of the ITAT order wherein four lines mentioned therein needs to be amended. 3. Accordingly, that Para needs to be read as under:- “ 21. Coming to the issue of whether the transaction of lease of cars, computers, plant and machinery, furniture are in the nature of operating lease or of the financing transaction, the coordinate bench in assessee’s own case has decided this issue for assessment year 1999 – 2000 to 2001 – 02 wherein it has been held that these transactions are in the nature of operating lease. Therefore, we do not find any reason to not to allow this ground of appeal to allow the depreciation. Accordingly ground with respect to the claim of the assessee to allow depreciation if the transactions are considered to be in the nature of financing transaction does not survive. Accordingly, as the assessee has been allowed the claim of depreciation, the alternative ground fails. Accordingly ground number 3 of the appeal is allowed as indicated above.” 4. It is further submitted that there are certain typographical errors which are also corrected as under:- Serial number Relevant paragraph and page number of the order Error pointed out Error corrected 1 Para number 8- page number seven 2001 – 0 2001 – 02 2 Para number nine-page number eight Ground number 2 of the appeal Ground number 3 of the appeal 3 Para 17-page number12 relevant irrelevant Page 3 of 3 4 Page number 19-page number 13 appreciation depreciation 5. We do not find any reason to number the grounds of appeal as those are mentioned in the order. 6. Accordingly miscellaneous application of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 3.11.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [PAVAN KUMAR GADALE] [PRASHANT MAHARISHI] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:-3.11.2023 Dragon Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR By order Assistant Registrar