SEW BELLARY HIGHWAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

An adjournment application has been filed by the assessee seeking adjournment of the case. However, a perusal of the order of the learned CIT (A) NFAC shows that the assessee had withdrawn the appeal before the CIT (A) NFAC for which the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal on the basis of the material available on record and after hearing the learned DR.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 17.10.2018 declaring ‘nil’ income after claiming deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.40,04,290/-. The return was processed by the CPC Bengaluru and intimation u/s 143(1) was passed on 21.12.2019 by determining the total income at Rs.11,34,47,280/- after disallowing depreciation allowance of Rs.11,33,82,477/- and making addition of Rs.64,800/- towards delayed deposit of PF. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and order u/s 143(3) was passed on 5.3.2021 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,75,25,520/- by making an addition of Rs.40,78,240/-.

The assessee filed a rectification application stating the assessee is eligible for depreciation allowance of Rs.11,33,82,477/- which was duly allowed in the previous A.Y. It was further submitted that the addition towards the delay in deposit of PF of Rs.64,800/- was made twice i.e., in the orders u/s 143(1) and 143(3).

The Assessing Officer accordingly passed rectification order u/s 154 r.w.s. 143(3) determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.40,78,243/- by granting depreciation of Rs.11,33,82,477/- and delayed deposit of PF of Rs.64,800/-.

The assessee had filed an appeal before the CIT (A) NFAC against the addition made earlier as per order u/s 143(3).. Subsequently, the assessee before the CIT (A) NFAC filed an application seeking withdrawal of the appeal based on which the learned CIT (A) NFAC allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal and accordingly dismissed the same by observing as under: Page 2 of 4

Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT (A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: “1. The order dt. 15.07.2022 of the learned NFAC CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The learned NFAC CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal as withdraw without disposing the grounds of appeal on merits, simply on the basis of withdrawal petition filed by the appellant”.

We have heard the learned DR and perused the available material on record. Since the substantial addition was deleted by the Assessing Officer himself in the rectification order, the assessee filed an application before the CIT (A) NFAC seeking permission to withdraw the appeal which the learned CIT (A) NFAC had allowed. Therefore, nothing survives and the grounds raised by the assessee being devoid of merit are dismissed.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.