DURAVIT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,अहमदाबाद यायपीठ
अहमदाबाद यायपीठ
अहमदाबाद यायपीठ
अहमदाबाद यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद।
अहमदाबाद।
अहमदाबाद।
अहमदाबाद।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
]
]
BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Asstt.Year : 2012-13
Duravit India Pvt Ltd
61, Titanium, Nr.Prahladnagar
Auda Garden, Prahladanagar
Ahmedabad 380 015. PAN : AACCD 3485 F
DCIT, Cir.1(1)(1)
Ahmedabad.
(Applicant)
(Responent)
Assessee by :
Shri Manish J. Shah, AR
Revenue by :
Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.DR
सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/05/2025
घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/05/2025
आदेश
आदेश
आदेश
आदेश/O R D E R
PER MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad
[“CIT(A)”], dated 30.01.2024, for the assessment year 2012–13, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The impugned order of the learned CIT(A) arises from the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(3) of the Act dated 11.03.2016, wherein the Assessing Officer had made, inter alia, an addition of Rs.1,15,27,236/- on account of transfer pricing adjustment. Aggrieved by the order of the learned
CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before us raising various
2
grounds of appeal, primarily challenging the addition of Rs.1,15,27,236/- on account of adjustment to the arm’s length price, and the disallowance of Rs.26,53,560/- on account of loss on amortization of forward contract premium, alleging that the same was disallowed due to inadvertent error.
However, during the pendency of the present appeal, the assessee has filed an application dated 05.05.2025 through its Authorised Representative, Shri Manish J. Shah, Advocate, stating that the assessee has opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (hereinafter “VSV Scheme”), by filing declaration in Form No. 1, which has been duly accepted by the Department. The assessee has furnished a copy of Form No. 2 (DIN / Acknowledgement Number: 950084871300425) issued under section 92(1) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, evidencing acceptance of the declaration and settlement of the tax arrears.
In view of the fact that the assessee has opted for resolution of the dispute under the VSV Scheme, 2024 and the appeal has been duly settled as evidenced by Form No. 2 issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-1, we find that nothing survives in the present appeal for adjudication.
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Court on 7th May, 2025 at Ahmedabad. (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad, dated 07/05/2025