Loading judgment…
Facts
Plastene India Limited appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14, challenging the reopening of assessment under Sections 148/147, issues related to Section 153A proceedings, and disallowances made by the AO concerning capital expenditure and Section 35.
Held
The assessee submitted a letter to the Tribunal expressing its intention to withdraw the appeal. Based on this withdrawal request, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment could be reopened under Section 148/147 given the original assessment status; validity of notice under Section 148 without proper satisfaction; applicability of Section 153A in absence of incriminating material; and correctness of disallowances of capital expenditure and under Section 35.
Sections Cited
143(1), 143(3), 144, 147, 148, 153A, 35
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-11, Ahmedabad, dated 08.01.2024, relating to the Assessment Year 2013- 2014. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The Ld. CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that since the assessment sought to be reopened is not an Plastene India Limited Vs .D CIT Asst. Year : 2013-14 - 2– assessment completed either u/s 143(3) or 144 or 143(1) of the Act, the same cannot be reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act.
The Ld. CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO of issuing notice u/s 148 without recording the requisite satisfaction in terms of the 1st proviso to section 147. 3. The Ld. CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the proceedings for the present year had not abated within the meaning of Section 153A of the Act and further, in absence of any incriminating material found in the course of the search, any of the additions could not be made in the captioned year. 4. The Ld. CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 19,41,795/-, made by the AO treating the same as capital expenditure. 5. The Ld. CIT(A)-11, Ahmedabad erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs.4,62,96,840/- made u/s 35 of the Act by the AO. 6. The Ld. AO erred in law in not appreciating the judicial dictum that what cannot be done directly under the law, cannot be done indirectly by taking recourse to any other section of the Act. 7. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter one or more grounds of appeal.
At the outset, we notice that the assessee has filed a letter dated 18.12.2024 stating its intension to withdraw the appeal. The relevant extract of the letter is reproduced as under:
… The Captioned appeal is fixed for hearing on 18th December, 2024 before the Hon’ble Bench. In the above connection, we submit that kindly allow us to withdraw the said appeal. The inconvenience cause to the Bench is deeply regretted…
In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn. Plastene India Limited Vs .D CIT Asst. Year : 2013-14 - 3–
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.