आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद (cid:586)ायपीठ “ C”, अहमदाबाद । , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु(cid:373)ी सुिच(cid:361)ा का(cid:638)ले (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एवं , (cid:373)ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद(cid:735) के सम(cid:407)।

]]

BEFORE Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.654/Ahd/2025 िनधा१रण वष१ Assessment Year : 2015-16 /

The Deputy Commissioner M/s. Inox Wind Energy of Income Tax, बनाम Limited, /

Circle-1(1)(1), v/s. ABS Tower S. No.1837 and Vadodara. 1834, Op Road, Vadodara-390007.

(Gujarat)

(cid:830)थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAFC14628K अपीलाथ(cid:334) (Appellant) (cid:366)(cid:797) यथ(cid:334) (Respondent)

/ /

Revenue by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR सुनवाई की तारीख Date of Hearing : 21/08/2025 /

घोषणा की तारीख Date of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 /

आदेश O R D E R /

PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM:

]]

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] dated 27.01.2025, arising out of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], on 18.12.2017 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

Facts of the Case

2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of Generation and sale of wind energy, providing erection and commissioning services of windmills and operation and maintenance of wind farms. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return on 30.11.2015, declaring Nil income (loss of Rs. 13,94,95,365). The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 08.04.2016. Thereafter notices u/s

142(1) were issued on multiple occasions.

3. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the books of account, the investments made by the assessee in various companies, the expenditure claimed in the profit and loss account, and the claim of depreciation on assets acquired under slump sale. After considering the explanations furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer framed the assessment under section 143(3) and made two principal disallowances, namely –

- A disallowance of Rs. 5,32,41,825/- under section 14A of the Act applying the formula prescribed under Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The Assessing Officer also made addition of the said amount under section 115JB of the Act.

- A disallowance of Rs. 36,24,015/- on account of depreciation on certain assets acquired in a slump sale transaction.

4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 5,32,41,825 made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A read with Rule 8D, holding that since the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year, no disallowance was called for. Consequently, the related adjustment of the same amount while computing book profit under section 115JB was also directed to be deleted. Further, the CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 36,24,015, observing that in the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2012–13 the ITAT, Ahmedabad had allowed depreciation on assets acquired under slump sale, and once depreciation is allowed in the initial year of acquisition, it cannot be disturbed in subsequent years in absence of any change in facts.

5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal:

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,32,41,825/- made under section 14A read with Rule 8D under the normal provisions, holding that the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income, in the absence of any such restriction being there in the relevant section or rule.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the