TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 960
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ard at "Camp Bench" of the Hon'ble ITAT at Jalandhar and the order has been passed by the Hon'ble Bench vide order, dated 17.01.2019. 2. That the finding of the Hon'ble Bench have been given in para 15. at pages 17 to 20 of the order of the Hon'ble Bench. 3. That in the said appeal, the issue was that Assessing Officer had disallowed 10% of the expenses as claimed by the assessee and for which the addition of Rs. 92,92,170/- was made and the said addition was sustained by the Worthy CIT(A), but, it was deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT. Thereafter, in the appeal of the department, to the Hon'ble High Court, such issue was remanded back to the Hon'ble ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar. 4. That no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve no power of enhancement and by way of this observation, there is enhancement of addition and, which is not justified since the Hon'ble Bench does not have power to enhance any addition. This view is supported by the Judgment of Apex Court in the case of MCorp Global (P) Ltd. Vs CIT as reported in [2009] 178 Taxman 347 (SC), in which, it has been held as under:- "Section 254 of the Income -tax Act, 1961- Appellate Tribunal-Powers of - Whether Tribunal can take back benefit granted to assessee by Assessing Officer-Held, no." 8. Similar view has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs CIT as reported in [1967] 63 ITR 0232, in which, it has been held as under:- "Words ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0232 (SC) It was further submitted that as the mistake is apparent from record, so this has to be rectified under section 254 of the Act. 3. In his rival submission the Ld. DR submitted that the ITAT has the power to enhance or reduce the addition so there is no mistake apparent from the record and the acceptance of the MA would result into illogical and erroneous revised order. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2018) 169 DTR 0073 (Kar). 4. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case it is an admitted fact that for the year under considerat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asis of such enquiry." The aforesaid order was followed in the case of MCorp Global (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT, Ghaziabad (2009) 178 Taxman 347 (SC) wherein their Lordship held in para 6 as under: " In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 this Court has held that under section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 equivalent to section 254(1) of the 1961 Act, the Tribunal was not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal has no power to enhance the assessment. Applying the ratio of the said judgment to the present case, we are of the view that, in this case, the Assessing Officer had granted depreciation in respect of 42,000 bottles out of the total number of bot....