Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against a Final Assessment Order for AY 2020-21, passed under Sections 143(3), 144C(13), and 144B, in pursuance of DRP directions under Section 144C(5). During the hearing, the assessee submitted that the dispute had been resolved under the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) between India and the USA, as communicated by the CBDT.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the dispute was resolved through MAP. With no objection from the Revenue, the assessee was allowed to withdraw the appeal, leading to its dismissal as withdrawn.
Key Issues
Whether an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be dismissed as withdrawn when the underlying dispute has been resolved through the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) between India and the USA.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144C(13), 144B, 144C(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.955/Hyd./2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Microsoft Global Services The DCIT, Centre India Private Circle-5(1), vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 004 PIN – 500 032. PAN AAECM2477L Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri Parth, Advocate For Revenue : Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, V.P. :
This appeal filed by the Assessee has been directed against the Final Assessment Order dated 25.07.2024 passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] in pursuance to the Directions dated 06.06.2024 of the Disputes Resolution Panel-1, [in short “DRP”], Bengaluru,
2 ITA.No.955/Hyd./2024 passed u/sec.144C(5) of the Act, for the assessment year 2020-2021.
At the time of hearing, Learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee has submitted that the dispute involved in this appeal has been resolved under the MAP as per the Order of the communication of the CBDT dated 11.09.2025 and copy of the same is filed before the Tribunal. Thus, the learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee submitted that the assessee may be allowed to withdraw the present appeal as the dispute has been settled under MAP.
The Learned CIT-DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, has no objection if the present appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
Considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee and the learned CIT-DR for the Revenue, at the outset, we note that the dispute involved in this appeal has been resolved by the 3 ITA.No.955/Hyd./2024 Competent Authorities of India and US as communicated by the CBDT vide letter dated 11.09.2025 as under :
4 ITA.No.955/Hyd./2024
In view of the fact that the dispute involved in the present appeal of the assessee has already been resolved in the MAP proceedings, accordingly, the assessee is allowed to withdraw the present appeal and consequently, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed as withdrawn.
Order pronounced on conclusion of hearing in the open Court on 23.09.2025.