SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 2539

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top