M/S AHLERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 [1], CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 441/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 July 2022AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal based on a misunderstanding of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme's applicability. The matter was therefore set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) under the mistaken belief that it had become infructuous due to the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee argued that the specific disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was not settled under the scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as infructuous without properly considering the applicability of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme to the specific disallowance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 02.06.2021 in the matter of an assessment framed by learned Assessing Officer on 22.08.2017 pursuant to the order of Tribunal in dated 03.03.2017.

2.

The Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the appeal has been dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) under the mistaken belief that the subject appeal has become infructuous due to the application of assessee under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Ld. AR submitted that the subject dispute of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for Rs.226.73 Lacs was not settled under the scheme and therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. The Ld. Sr. DR could not controvert this position.

3.

Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the assessee’s appeal has been dismissed as infructuous on the ground that the assessee has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. However, as per statement made by Ld. AR, the assessee has not opted for VSVS in respect of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). Considering the same, the impugned order is set aside and Ld. CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the issue on merits.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st July, 2022.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →