IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘B’: NEW DELHI.

BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2018-19)

Standard Castings Private Limited, vs. ITO, Ward 24(1), A – 3, 3^rd Floor, Phase – I, Delhi.

Mayapuri Industrial Area, Mayapuri, Delhi – 110 064.

(PAN : AABCS0787L)

(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

ASSESSEE BY :Shri Satyen Sethi, Advocate Shri A.T. Panda, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.08.2025 Date of Order : 19.11.2025

O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 17.06.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

2. Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed its return of income for AY

2018-19 on 21.09.2018 declaring total income at Rs.nil under the normal provisions and declared profit of Rs.5,57,01,251/- as per the provisions of section 115JB of the Income-tax Act,1961 (for short ‘the Act’) The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 21.12.2019, wherein the total income is computed at Rs.7,08,56,368/-. In computing the total income, the set off of business loss of Rs.12,03,32,271/- was not allowed.

3. Aggrieved, assessee filed a rectification application u/s 154 before the CPC. However, the CPC vide order dated 21.12.2019 has intimated the assessee that rectification rights have been transferred to Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO).

4. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under E-assessment Scheme 2019. After considering the details submitted by the assessee, the Assessing Officer has not made any addition in the assessment order completed u/s 143(3) and has accepted the computation of capital gains and details of income filed by the assessee. However, for computing the total income, the Assessing Officer has taken the income as determined u/s 143(1) of the Act.

5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, Delhi and filed grounds of appeal and also filed detailed submissions which are reproduced in the impugned appellate order at pages 3 to 9. Brief submissions made by the assessee are that the assessee had sold industrial plot in Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase 1, New Delhi with super-

structure including terrace rights to M/s. Courage Infotech Pvt. Ltd. for a consideration of Rs.19.70 crores vide registered sale deed dated 12.06.2017. The assessee has submitted computation of capital gain and further submitted that while filing the return of income it inadvertently punched ‘Row 3c’of Schedule BP instead of ‘Row 3b’ i.e. instead of punching in row of capitals gains, it has wrongly punched on the row of other sources. Assessee has noticed the above said mistake in order processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on which CPC has determined the total income of Rs.7,08,56,368/- against the nil income under regular computation. In so computing the income, set off of business loss of Rs.12,03,32,271/- was not allowed. Further assessee also filed a rectification. It was also brought to the notice of the ld. CIT (A) that assessment u/s 143(3) was completed, however the AO chose to retain the demand as per section 143(1) of the Act and prayed that the order passed u/s 143(1) is merged with assessment order u/s 143(3).

6. After considering the detailed submissions of the assessee, ld. CIT (A)

rejected the plea of the assessee with the observation that Assessing Officer has not made any addition in the assessment order completed u/s 143 (3) and has accepted the computation of capital gains and details of income filed by the assessee. However, for computing the total income, the Assessing Officer has determined the income as per section 143(1) of the Act. From the above facts, it is evident that grounds of appeal did not relate to the impugned assessment order passed u/s 143(3), therefore, it is beyond the scope of this