IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT &

SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4964/MUM/2025(AY: 2018–19)

Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax (as successor to Mahindra Two Department, National Faceless Wheelers Limited which in turn Assessment Centre Local is successor to Mahindra Jurisdictional Assessing Trucks and Buses Limited Officer-

Compnay Deputy Commissioner of Income Mahindra Tower, Second Floor, tax, Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai.

Corporate Taxation Room No. 545, 5^th Floor, Department, P.K. Kurne Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Chowk, Worli, Mumbai - Mumbai.

400018 PAN: AAACM3025E of Mahindra & Mahindra Limited AAACM7863L of erstwhile Mahindra Trucks And Buses Limited (Appellant) .. (Respondent Assessee by Shri. Jitendra Trivedi, CA Revenue by Shri. Ritesh Misra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 25/09/2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi (in short „Ld. CIT(A)‟) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „the Act‟), dated 09.06.2025 for the A.Y. 2018-19, which in turn arises from the assessment order passed by National e-Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Delhi (in short „Ld. AO‟) u/s. 143(3) r.ws. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act dated 01.03.2021.

2. The grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee are as under:

“Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ('CIT(A)'), Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Mumbai (as successor to Mahindra Two Wheeler Limited which is in turn successor to Mahindra Trucks and Buses Limited) (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellant') hereby submits the following grounds of appeal for your sympathetic consideration; these grounds are being raised without prejudice to one another.

1. Disallowance of Advertisement & Sales Promotion Expense of Rs.3,26,00,000/-

a. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Advertisement & Sales Promotion expenditure incurred of Rs.3,26,00,000 as capital expenditure and allowing depreciation thereon, ignoring the fact that no asset, tangible or intangible, was created, and the expenditure was not otherwise also capital-in-nature.

b. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the expenditure as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act, as claimed by the Appellant since such expenditure were incurred wholly for business purpose to increase sales and customer service.

c. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that even if the said expenditure resulted in some enduring benefit, it was not in the capital field and was, hence, allowable as a revenue expense under section 37 of the Act.

2. Adjustments made under section 143(1) of the Act a. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in summarily rejecting/ not adjudicating the grounds with respect to adjustments made under section 143(1) for normal and book profit income and ignoring the submissions made by the Appellant.

b. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in computing assessed income starting with normal income of Rs.25,42,22,300 as per Intimation under section 143(1) (as against Rs.25,40,55,650 as per return of income), without appreciating the submissions on merits stating that Rs. 1,66,652 has already been disallowed by the Appellant itself in the return of income filed as 'Any other item or items of addition under section 28 to 44DA'.

c. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in considering assessed book profits at Rs.29,89,4