INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (MUMBAI BENCH)
TECHNOCRAFT INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED MUMBAI – Appellant
Versus
ASST. CIT 11(3)(1) MUMBAI – Respondent
ITA 7422/MUM/2025[2013-14]
##PAGE1##
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.7422/Mum/2025 (Assessment year: 2013-14)
ITA No.7423 /Mum/2025 (Assessment year: 2012-13)
Technocraft Industries (India) vs Assistant Commissioner of Income
Ltd. Tax-11(3)(1), Mumbai
A-25, Technocraft House, Aayakr Bhawan, Marine Lines
MIDC Industrial Estate, Road Mumbai-400020
No.3, Andheri (E), Chakala
MIDC S.O. Mumbai-400093
PAN: AAACT2724P
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Assessee by : Shri Tarang Mehta, Adv. a/w Shri Akash GogariCA
Respondent by : Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Date of hearing : 27/01/2026
Date of pronouncement : 03/02/2026
O R D E R
Per Bench:
Both the appeals of the assessee filed against the separate order of the
NFAC, Delhi (for brevity ‘the ld. CIT(A), order passed under section 250 of the
Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for assessment years 2012-13 & 13-14,
date of order for both the appeals 24.10.2025. Both the impugned orders
emanated from the separate orders of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income
##PAGE2##2
ITA No.7422 & 7423/Mum/2025
Technocraft Industries India Ltd.
Tax-11(3)(1), Mumbai (for brevity the ld. Ld. AO), order passed under section
143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, date of both the orders 18.12.2019.
2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee, involving similar
issues arising out of a similar factual matrix, these appeals were heard together as
a matter of convenience and are being decided by way of this consolidated order.
With the consent of the parties, the appeal for the A.Y. 2012-13, ITA
No.7423/Mum/2025 is treated as a lead case, and the decision rendered therein
shall apply mutatis mutandis to other appeal before us.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public limited company
and engaged in business of manufacturing and exporting drum, closures,
scaffolding, cotton yearn, knitted cotton and taxtile products. The assessee also
listed on the National Stock Exchange as well as Bombay Stock Exchange. The
assessee filed the return by declaring total income Rs.35,41,16,838/-. Thereafter,
the assessee revised its return and declaring the same income. The case was
selected for scrutiny and assessment was framed u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 144(C)(3) of
the Act and completed on 26.05.2016 without making any addition or
disallowance on account of expenses towards Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) of Rs. 2.5 crore paid to “Shanti Seva Nidhi” (SSN). Subsequently the Ld. AO
reopened the assessee’s case u/sec. 148 of the Act dated 12.03.2019. The
assessee filed the return u/sec. 148 and asked the recorded reason for reopening
of assessment. During the reassessment the Ld. AO noted that the assessee
claimed expenses u/sec. 37 amount of Rs.2.5/-crore which was related to CSR.
The said CSR expenses amount to Rs.2.5/-crore is claimed under the head “other
##PAGE3##3
ITA No.7422 & 7423/Mum/2025
Technocraft Industries India Ltd.
expenses” in P&L account. on verification Ld. AO found that the assessee had
claimed aforesaid amount as donation to Trust, “Shanti Seva Nidhi”, an
Educational Institution in which children of several employees of assessee are
studying. The Ld. AO disallowed the said expenses claimed by the assessee u/sec.
37 of the Act and added back with the total income. During the assessment
proceeding the assessee contended that the same issue in assessee’s own case
for A.Y. 2010-11 was already examined and adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench
of ITAT, Mumbai related to payment of Rs.50,00,000/- to SSN which was claimed
as expenses U/s 37 in P&L A/c. The Coordinate Bench has accepted the alleged
expenses as eligible expenses and allowed the appeal of the assessee. But the Ld.
AO in impugned assessment year confirmed the addition of the alleged expenses
without considering the order of the ITAT on the ground that the order of ITAT
was not received through the proper channel. The aggrieved assessee filed an
appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. C
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.