ACIT CIRCLE-14(1), NEW DELHI vs. KANTI BIJLEE UTPADAN NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5586/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 September 2022AY 2013-144 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the disputed tax liability under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the treatment of interest and other receipts earned during the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee had settled the disputed tax liability under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable after the assessee has settled the tax liability under the Vivad se Vishwas Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but the dispute pertains to the taxability of certain income.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 01/09/2022Pronounced: 01/09/2022

Date of hearing: 01/09/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 01/09/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-5, New Delhi dated 28.03.2019 for A.Y.2013-14.

2. The grievance of the revenue read as under :- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the interest of Rs.2,18,79,804/- earned from bank deposits is inextricably linked to the development / setting up of the Power plant by wrongly relying on the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of NTPC Sail Power Company Ltd. Vs. CIT and Indian Oil Panipat power Construction Ltd. vs. ITO (2009 315 ITR 255) (Del.). The facts and ratio of these case laws is not applicable to this case.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the interest of Rs.1,54,00,667/- recovered from contractors is inextricably linked to the development / setting up of the Power plant by wrongly relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315. The facts and ratio of these case laws is not applicable to this case.

3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that other receipts of Rs.32,63,954/- recovered from contractors is inextricably linked to the development / setting up of the Power plant.

4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that miscellaneous income of Rs.18,05,630/- out of total amount of Rs.41,57885/- recovered towards rent from employees for stage two expansion and contractors is inextricably linked to the development/ setting up of the Power plant.

3.

At the very outset the Counsel drew our attention to form 5 being order for full and final settlement of tax under the direct tax VSVS Act 2020 and pointed out that the impugned quarrel has been settled by the assessee by paying the requisite tax.

4.

We have carefully perused form No.5 which is as under :-

5.

A perusal of the above show that disputed tax in has been settled by the assessee thereby making this appeal by the revenue otios and is accordingly dismissed.

6.

Decision announced in the open court on 01.09.2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →