Aurobindo Pharma Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
A recent decision by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Hyderabad in the case of Aurobindo Pharma Limited versus the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) sheds light on the scope of Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act and the importance of raising all relevant arguments during the main appeal proceedings. Here’s a summary of the case and the tribunal’s ruling:
Background
Aurobindo Pharma Limited filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA) seeking modification of the ITAT’s order dated 21.06.2023 in ITA No.1860/Hyd/2019 for the assessment year 2015-16 under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act.
Assessee’s Arguments
The assessee argued that certain grounds related to trade receivables, partly allowed by the Tribunal, should be dismissed entirely instead of granting partial relief. They relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MCorp Global Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2009) 309 ITR 434/178 Taxmann 347 (SC), asserting that once a benefit is granted, it cannot be taken away by the tribunal.
Tribunal’s Analysis
The tribunal noted that the assessee did not raise these arguments during the main appeal proceedings. Furthermore, the documents referred to in the MA were not submitted or discussed during the initial hearing. Therefore, the tribunal concluded that considering these unraised arguments in the MA was not justified.
