DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. INVENTA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Coming to the Revenue’s appeal CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts holding the assessee’s income of Rs.12,46,16,453/- derived from mushroom production as agricultural and therefore exempt u/s.10(1) of the Act, both the learned lower representatives fairly admitted that this tribunal’s Special Bench’s decision in taxpayer’s own case reported as [2018] 95 taxmann.com 162 (Hyderabad - Trib.) (SB) (for AYs.2008-09 onwards) has decided the same against the department. We thus adopt judicial consistency and uphold the CIT(A)’s findings under challenge for this reason alone. Its main appeal fails therefore.

Next comes the assessee’s cross objection No.06/Hyd/2020 raising its sole substantive grievance that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in disallowing corporate social responsibility claim of Rs.1,52,32,000/- u/s.28 r.w.s.37 of the Act.

Learned authorised representative stated at the bar that the assessee does not wish to press for the instant Cross Objection as it is availing settlement benefit under the ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020’ by filing Form Nos.1 & 2 to this effect.

The assessee’s sole identical plea in this case therefore is that since the department is yet to finalise its settlement pleas, this Cross Objection may not be dismissed as withdrawn as on date. We find no merit in assessee’s above stated contention per se. The fact remains that it has filed for settlement benefit and therefore, no purpose would be served if this appeal is kept pending. We dismiss the same as withdrawn and further make it clear that it shall be open for the assessee to file for revival of its Cross Objection if the above settlement benefit is denied to it for technical reasons. Ordered accordingly.