MADHUR BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 210/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 October 2022AY 2013-146 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, respectfully following its own prior decision in a case with identical facts and issues, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned additions made by the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against a consolidated order of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15. The issues and underlying facts were identical to previous appeals decided by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the additions made by the revenue were justified, given that identical issues and facts had been decided in favour of the assessee in previous appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N.K. BILLAIYA & SH. KUL BHARAT

Hearing: 17/10/2022Pronounced: 17/10/2022

Appellant Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CA Sh. Lakshya Goyal, Advocate Respondent Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR Date of hearing: 17/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 17/10/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: 209, 210 and 211/Del/2021 are appeals by the assessee preferred against a consolidated order of the CIT(A)-29, New Delhi dated 05.02.2020 by which the CIT(A) disposed the appeals of the assessee for A.Y.2011-12, 2012-13,2013-14 and 2014-15.

2.

All these appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

At the very outset the Counsel for the assessee stated that this Tribunal vide order dated 18.01.2022 in a bunch of appeals pertaining to M/s. Kaksh Impex Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Paksh Marketing Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Vrindavan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., and M/s. Madhur Buildcom Pvt. Ltd. have disposed of the bunch of appeals having identical issues and identical underlying facts in the issues.

4.

The Counsel pointed out that in that bunch of appeals pertained to the assessee Madhur Buildcom Private Limited for A.Y.2016-17 and the consolidated order of the CIT(A) in the present appeal has also considered A.Y. 2016-17.

5.

Though the DR strongly supported the findings of the CIT(A) and read para 4.3 on page 44 of the order to butteress her submission but could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the revenue.

6.

We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The CIT(A) while deciding the appeal of the assessee held as under :-

7.

We find that this Tribunal in for A.Y.2016-17 vide order dated 18.01.2022 had considered identical facts and held as under :-

xxxxx

8.

Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench we direct the AO to delete the impugned addition.

9.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.

10.

Decision announced in the open court on 17.10.2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →