SOJITZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 8, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6909/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 August 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was permitted in order to give effect to the Unilateral APA.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought to withdraw its appeal before the ITAT. This withdrawal was based on the ground that a Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) had been entered into with the CBDT.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be withdrawn to give effect to a Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement with the CBDT.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 10RA(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘Friday’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY

Hearing: 16.8.2019Pronounced: 16.8.2019

Appellant by None Revenue by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.8.2019 Date of Pronouncement 16.8.2019 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM Assessee seeks to withdraw this appeal on the ground that in view of Rule 10RA(4) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, to give effect to the Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement with CBDT dated 8.1.2019, the appeal has to be withdrawn before furnishing the modified income-tax return. The learned DR has no objection and recording the same, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

2.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16th August, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →