TOYOTA TSUSHO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGAORE V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

MA 48/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around a miscellaneous application by Toyota Tsusho India Private Limited under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, seeking rectification of an inadvertent dismissal of a ground related to working capital adjustment in a previous ruling. The ITAT acknowledged the mistake and recalled the ground, referencing favorable precedents in the assessee's own earlier cases. The Tribunal directed the matter to be examined afresh by the appropriate authorities to determine the correct working capital adjustment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25248 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2024
• Other Referred Cases: IT(TP)A No. 3372/Bang/2018, IT(TP)A No. 2806/Bang/2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V PARITHIVEL
• Assessee Lawyers: DARPAN KRIPLANI; WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MADE US
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No. 48/Bang/2024 IT(TP)A No. 241/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Toyota Tsusho India Private Limited, Plot No. 33 & 34, Bidadi Industrial Area, Ramanagara District, Bengaluru-562 109. PAN – AADCS 6230 N Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bengaluru. The NFAC, Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Darpan Kriplani, CA Revenue by : Shri V Parithivel, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 13.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06.11.2024 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee by way of this miscellaneous application made u/s 254(2) of the Act seeks to decide the issue raised in ground No. 12, which was dismissed inadvertently by the ITAT holding that it was not pressed. 2. The assessee in the miscellaneous application submitted that the ld. AR during the course of hearing has argued ground No. 10 seeking for the working capital adjustment. As per the assessee, such issue was M.A No.48/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 4 . covered in its favour in its own case for the assessment year 2014-15 in IT(TP)A No. 3372/Bang/2018 and in the assessment year 2013-14 in IT(TP)A No. 2806/Bang/2017. However, the ITAT in its order inadvertently has given the finding that the impugned issue was not pressed by the ld. AR for the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee, being a mistake apparent from record, seeks rectification of the same by adjudicating ground No. 10 with the direction to grant working capital adjustment, within the meaning of provisions 254(2) of the Act. 3. In view of the above, the ld. AR prayed to modify the order passed by the ITAT in IT(TP)A No. 241/Bang/2021 to the extent discussed above. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR could not controvert the arguments advanced by the ld. AR for the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. From the preceding discussion, we note that the ITAT inadvertently has recorded the finding that the issue relating to ground No.10 was not pressed by the ld.AR of the assessee, which is a mistake apparent from the record in pursuance to the provisions of sec. 254(2) of the Act. Accordingly, we recall the ground No.10 raised by the assessee in the memo of appeal. Hence, the miscellaneous appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 5.1 Coming to the merit of the case, we note that the ITAT in the own case of the assessee in earlier years cited above has allowed the ground of appeal in favour of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order of M.A No.48/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 4 . the ITAT in the own case of the assessee cited (AY 2013-14 in IT(TP)A No. 2806/Bang/2017) above is reproduced as under: “7.4 The assessee has raised two additional grounds on different dates towards working capital adjustment to be provided for difference in the working capital possession of the assessee vis-a- vis with the comparable companies in respect to trading and manufacturing segments On going through the submission made by the ld.AR of the assessee and considering the arguments advanced by the ld.DR, we note that in subsequent year in IT(TP)A NO. 3372/Bang/2018 for the AY 2014-15, the coordinate bench of the Tribunal has granted working capital adjustment by holding as under:- 10. Ground No. 08 is on the issue of working capital adjustment. We find that the assessee in its TP study has in annexure G, given working of the working capital adjustment and claimed grant of working capital adjustment while determining the ALP. After perusing the order of the DRP and considering the arguments of the Id. CIT(DR) , we are of the considered opinion that this issue should be restored to the file of the AO for examining the data furnished by the assessee and thereafter grant working capital adjustment as requested by the assessee. 11. In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 17.5 Before us, the assessee has taken by way of additional ground in regard to adjustment towards working capital but the assessee has not provided any data in respect of the calculation of working capital adjustment. The assessee is directed to provide necessary data for computation of working capital adjustment. Respectfully following the judgment of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for subsequent assessment year, we remit this issue to the file of AO/TPO/DRP in terms of the above decision. 17.6 These additional grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.” 5.2 In view of the above, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO/TPO for granting the benefit of working capital adjustment as per the provisions of law. Hence, ground of appeal bearing ground No.10 of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. M.A No.48/Bang/2024 Page 4 of 4 . 6. In the result, the ground No.10 of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 6th day of November, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) (WASEEM AHMED) Vice President Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated, 6th November, 2024 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "