CIT(A) Wrongly notes Long-Term Capital Loss as Rs.16.89 Lakhs Instead of Rs.16.89 Crores: ITAT Orders Verification [Read Order]
The tribunal observed that the issue required verification and deemed it appropriate to restore the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication
![CIT(A) Wrongly notes Long-Term Capital Loss as Rs.16.89 Lakhs Instead of Rs.16.89 Crores: ITAT Orders Verification [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/ITAT-Mumbai-Capital-Loss-Long-Term-Capital-Loss-taxscan.jpg "CIT(A) Wrongly notes Long-Term Capital Loss as Rs.16.89 Lakhs Instead of Rs.16.89 Crores: ITAT Orders Verification [Read Order]")
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for verification, in a case where a capital loss amounting to Rs. 16.89 crores was wrongly recorded as Rs. 16.89 lakhs by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Businessmatch Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. (assessee), engaged in consultancy services related...
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for verification, in a case where a capital loss amounting to Rs. 16.89 crores was wrongly recorded as Rs. 16.89 lakhs by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)].
Businessmatch Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. (assessee), engaged in consultancy services related to private placement, loans, and insurance business advice. The assessee filed return of income for AY 2014–15 declaring a total loss of Rs. 22.63 crore and a book loss under section 115JB of Rs. 5.44 crore.
The assessee claimed a long-term capital loss of Rs. 16,89,86,412 for carry forward. The AO wrongly stated the long-term capital loss as Rs. 13.05 crore without disputing the assessee’s claim.
The Future of Taxation is Here – Unravel the Income Tax Bill 2025! - Click Here
Aggrieved by the AO’s order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Though the CIT(A) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, erroneously recorded the figure as Rs. 16,89,412.
The assessee filed a rectification application but the CIT(A) rejected the same citing that the figure mentioned in the assessee’s grounds of appeal was Rs. 16,89,412. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee filed an appeal before ITAT.
The counsel for the assessee submitted that the return of income clearly reflected the correct figure of Rs. 16.89 crores, which was also part of the paper book.
On the other hand, the counsel for revenue did not object to the need for verification and agreed that the issue should be verified by the AO.
The Future of Taxation is Here – Unravel the Income Tax Bill 2025! - Click Here
The two-member bench comprising B.R. Baskaran (Accountant Member) and Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) observed that the issue required verification and deemed it appropriate to restore the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.
The tribunal set aside the order of CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the AO for verification. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
