SHIRISH MODY ENTERPRISES LLP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 21 (3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2282/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 October 2021AY 2014-152 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee made an application to withdraw the appeal. The Tribunal granted permission to withdraw the appeal after considering the submission and the Department's lack of objection.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal challenged the denial of benefits related to the holding period of long-term capital assets due to alleged non-compliance with Section 47(xiiib).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee complied with the provisions of Section 47(xiiib) to be eligible for benefits under Section 49(l)(e) and Explanation 1(b) to Section 2(42A) regarding the holding period of long-term capital assets.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 49(l)(e),Section 2(42A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai

For Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma
Hearing: 14.10.2021Pronounced: 14.10.2021

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of learned CIT-A dated 27.2.2019 pertaining to assessment year 2014-15.

2.

The grounds of appeal read as under :- “1.1. The learned CIT (A) has erred in upholding the additions made by the AO on the grounds that the appellant has failed to comply with the provisions of section 47(xiiib) and as a result, the benefit under section 49(l)(e) read with explanation l(b) of section 2(42A) cannot be granted to the appellant with regards to the period of holding in respect of long term capital assets. 1.2. She has also erred in not appreciating the facts placed on record evidencing that the appellant has duly complied with all the conditions stipulated in proviso to section 47(xiiib).”

3.

At the outset it is noted that the assessee has made an application that he shall be withdrawing the appeal. Learned departmental representative did not have any objection to this proposition.

2 Shirish Mody Enterprises LLP

4.

Up on careful consideration I have granted permission to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Pronounced in the open court on 14.10.2021.

More judgments on Section 2(42A)

All 193 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(42A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →