IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5048/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-2018)

Digital Insight India Products Private Limited

2nd Floor, Block B, Godrej IT Park – P2, Pirojshanagar, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai – 400079.

Maharashtra.

[PAN:AAHCP2882K] …………. Appellant Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 6(2)(2), Mumbai

5^th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400020 Maharashtra. …………. Respondent ITA No. 5036/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-2018)

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 6(2)(2), Mumbai

5^th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400020 Maharashtra. …………. Appellant Vs Digital Insight India Products Private Limited

2nd Floor, Block B,Godrej IT Park-P2, Pirojshanagar, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079. Maharashtra [PAN:AAHCP2882K] …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee S: Shri Nageswar Rao For the Respondent/Department S: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal Date Conclusion of hearing : 05.02.2025 Pronouncement of order : 29.04.2025

O R D E R

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1. These are Cross-Appeals arising out of Order, dated 31/07/2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the „CIT(A)’], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟], whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 23/11/2019, passed under Section

143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-2018.

2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of Appeal in ITA No.5048/Mum/2024:

“Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Digital Insight India Products Private Limited ("Digital Insight" or "the Company" or "the Appellant") respectfully craves, leave to prefer an appeal under Section 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") against the order dated 31 July 2024 ('Impugned Order") passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ["CIT(A)"] upholding order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai ('Ld. AO") dated 23 November 2019 issued under Section 143(3) of the Act, on the following grounds:

1. The order of the learned CIT(A)/Ld. AO is based on incorrect application of facts and wrong interpretation of law and therefore, is bad in law.

2. The learned CIT(A)/ Ld. AO has grossly disregarded the facts submitted by the Appellant and erred in law by violating the principles laid down under Section 50B of the Act, in treating the slump sale transaction as income under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession

3. The learned CIT(A)/ Ld. AO has erred, in law and on facts, in treating the transaction of slump sale of business as "business sale" and not "slump sale" of business and thereby. has erred, in law and on facts, in treating net gain arising on slump sale of business as taxable business income instead of the same being taxable under the head "Capital Gains"

4. The learned CIT(A)/ Ld.AO has erred, in law and on facts, by not appreciating that the "trade receivable" in the books of the Company is nothing but the amount receivable by the Company from the buyer on slump sale of business and that the same does not represent "trade receivable of the business transferred under the slump sale. The learned CIT(A)/Ld. AO has therefore, erred in holding that all the assets of the business are not transferred to the buyer breaching the condition of "slump sale of business provided under Section 2(42C) read with Section 50B of the Act.

5. The learned CIT(A) has erred, in law and on facts, in holding that Form 3CEA is the basis of determining the purchase price and hence, values are assigned to individual assets and liabilities of the business without appreciating that Form 3CEA is a certificate issued by a chartered accountant indicating th