What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel informed the Tribunal that the assessee no longer wished to pursue the appeal and requested to withdraw it. The Tribunal granted permission for withdrawal.

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's disallowance of deduction under Section 80-IA(4)(iii). The assessee had also raised grounds regarding the incorrect assessment of income and violation of natural justice.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's eligibility for deduction under Section 80-IA(4)(iii). However, the appeal was withdrawn before this could be adjudicated.

Mahaveer Audhogik Asthan… vs ITO | ITAT Dehradun 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. DR

Hearing: 21.11.2023Pronounced: 21.11.2023

O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Haldwani, dated 26.03.2018, pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in not allowing the deduction u/s 801A(4)(iii) in respect of development of industrial park, more so when assessee has complied with all the formalities of verification and counter verification for claiming such deduction.

That in any case and in any view of the matter, income which has been assessed is wrong in as much as the cost of acquisition of the land ought to have been taken at the price adopted while calculating capital gain in the hands of the member of the AOP.

3. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in not allowing the benefit of deduction u/s 801A(4)(iii) which is bad in law, illegal, unjustified, contrary to facts & law and based upon recording of incorrect facts and finding, without giving adequate opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice and without considering the submissions of assessee.

4. That in any case and in any view of the matter action of Ld. A.O in framing the impugned assessment order is contrary to law and facts, void ab initio, beyond jurisdiction and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds 5. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal

at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.”

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted at the Bar that the assessee has instructed not to pursue the present appeal and has requested for permission of the Bench to withdraw the appeal.

Learned DR raised no objection to the request so made on behalf of the assessee at the Bar.

In view of the above statement of the learned counsel at the Bar, the assessee is permitted to withdraw the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal preferred by the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in open court on 21.11.2023.

MAHAVEER AUDHOGIK ASTHAN (SANSTHAN),NAINITAL vs. ITO, HALDWANI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments