OWENS-CORNING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4352/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Owens-Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2006-07. The appeal challenged various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer, including ad-hoc disallowances of expenses and depreciation on fixed assets, and issues related to the calculation of tax demand and violations of natural justice. However, the company opted to settle the dispute under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme-2024', leading to the withdrawal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470897 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Depreciation; Principle of natural justice; TDS
• Section: 143(3); 32

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4352/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Owens-Corning (India)Pvt. Ltd., Alpha Building, 7th Floor, Hiranandani Gardens,Powai, Mumbai – 400 076 (PAN : AAACO1739M) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax- 15(1)(1), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Ms. Kinjal Mehta, AR Revenue : Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066368031(1), dated 03.07.2024, passed against the assessment order by National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi, u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 26.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1.0 Re: The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) ('CIT(A)') concluded the proceedings by merely upholding Learned Assessing Officer's (L.d.AO) action without considering the submission made by the Appellant 2 ITA No. 4352/Mum/2024 Owens-Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd.; AY 2006-07 1.1 The CITIA) has emed in not considering the submission dated 18 June 2024 although it has referred to another letter dated 18 June 2024 filed in relation to additional evidence. 1.2 The CIT(A) has completely ignored the above submission and concluded the proceedings alleging that no submission was made bill the date of its order. 2.0 Re: Disallowance of expenses on ad-hoc basis being 5% of the total expense of INR 15:47.02.015-INR 77,35,100 2.1 The CIT (AV Ld. AO has erred in making an ad-hoc disallowance of INR 77,35,100 being 5% of the expenses of INR 15,47,02,015 incurred by the Appellant 2.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law prevailing on the subject, the ad-hoc disallowance of expenses of INR 77,35, 100 incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business and the action of the CIT (A) and Ld. AO in this respect is erroneous, misconceived and not in accordance with the law 2.3 The Appellant prays that the Ld. AO be directed to delete the aforementioned disallowance so made by him and to re-compute the Appellant's total income accordingly 3.0 Re.: Disallowance of depreciation on addition to the fixed assets - INR 49,55,280 3.1 The CIT(A)/Ld AO has erred in disallowing part of the depreciation claimed on the fixed assets for additions made during the aforesaid year 3.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law prevailing on the subject, the disallowance of part of depreciation under section 32 of the Act in respect addition made to fixed asset and the action of the CIT (A) and Ld. AO in this respect is erroneous, misconceived and not in accordance with the law. 3.3 The Appellant prays that the Ld. AO be directed to allow the part depreciation claimed by the Appellant and to re-compute the Appellant's total income accordingly. 4.0 Re: Non-consideration of relief granted by CIT(A) in respect of depreciation on feeder lines -INR 25,85,435 4.1 The CIT(A) Ld. AO during remand proceeding erred in not considering relief granted by CIT(A) in first round of proceedings vide its order dated 28 January 2011 allowing depreciation on feeder lines of INR 25.65,435. 4.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law prevailing on the subject, the disallowance of depreciation on feeder lines despite relief provided by CIT(A) is erroneous, misconceived and not in accordance with the law. 3 ITA No. 4352/Mum/2024 Owens-Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd.; AY 2006-07 4.3 The Appellant prays that the Ld. AO be directed to grant relief already provided by CIT(A) vide order dated 28 January 2011 and re-compute the Appellant's total Income accordingly. 5.0 Re: Incorrect raising of demand amounting to INR 63,44,692 5.1 The CIT(A) has erred in upholding the calculation of demand of INR 63,44,692 done by the Ld. AO without any basis. 5.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO ought to have appreciated that the disallowances made by him were already given effect to by the earlier order of the AO and there being set off of brought forward losses of earlier years towards the income of the year under consideration there could be no demand on account of these adjustments. 5.3 The Ld. AO has calculated and raised a demand of INR 63,44,692 after arriving at NIL income. This is because a refund of INR 64,70,687 was already issued to the Appellant. However, the Ld. AO erred in not considering advance tax credit of INR 45,00,000 and TDS credit of INR 51,10,673 claimed in the Income tax return while computing tax. 5.4 The Appellant further submits that the Ld. AO be directed to re-compute the tax liability accordingly. 6.0 Re: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice 6.1 The Ld. AO erred in concluding remand proceeding under section 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act without providing adequate time to collate the details and file the submissions. 6.2 The CIT(A) erred in concluding appeal proceeding without considering the detailed written submission filed by the Appellant. 6.3 The CIT(A) erred in not granting opportunity of being heard by virtual conference in respect of above grounds of appeal despite the specific request made by the Appellant in its submission dated 18 June 2024. 6.4 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject, the action of the CIT (A) and Ld. AO in this respect is erroneous, misconceived and not in accordance with the law. 7.0 Re.: General: 7.1. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute and/or modify in any manner whatsoever all or any of the foregoing grounds of objections at or before the hearing of the appeal.” 3. Assessee has placed on record a written submission dated 10.03.2025, wherein it has opted to resolve the dispute in this appeal 4 ITA No. 4352/Mum/2024 Owens-Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd.; AY 2006-07 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme-2024’ (VSV, 2024 scheme). Assessee has filed Form-1 dated 31.01.2025 against which the designed authority has issued a certificate in Form-2 determining tax refund position, under the scheme. 4. Considering these facts on record and assessee having paid the demand as required under the said scheme, we find it appropriate to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn, pursuant to the option availed by assessee for resolving the dispute in this appeal under VSV, 2024. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is dismissed with a liberty to restore / revive the appeal, in case the application for ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme-2024’ do not materialize or is not accepted by the department. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 17 March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Beena Pillai) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 17 March, 2025 MP, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1 The Appellant 2 The Respondent 3 DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4 5 Guard File CIT BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "