MADURA COATS PVT. LTD.,KARNATAKA vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3283/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 June 2020AY 2008-094 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 submitted a letter to the Tribunal expressing its wish to withdraw the appeal as the re-computation by the TPO resulted in substantial relief, making the appeal infructuous. The Departmental Representative had no objection.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning transfer pricing adjustments for AY 2008-09. The CIT(A) had upheld the Comparable Uncontrolled Price method and directed a re-computation of adjustments.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be permitted to withdraw its appeal when the issue has become infructuous due to subsequent relief.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR

Hearing: 09.06.2020Pronounced: 09.06.2020

आदेश / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by assessee for assessment year 2008- 09 is directed against common appellate order dated 30.09.2019 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai (hereinafter called “the CIT(A)”) in 0488/2014-15 & 489/2014-15 for assessment years (ay) 2008- 09,2002-03 and 2003-04 respectively , but, however for us ay:

2008-09 is relevant, the appellate proceedings before learned CIT(A) had arisen from assessment order dated 09.12.2011 passed by learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called “the AO”) u/s.143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”). The appellate proceedings before the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (hereinafter called “the Tribunal”) was conducted on 09.06.2020 via Virtual Court.

2.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing before the tribunal through video conferencing, Mr.SP Chidambaram, the Ld. representative for the assessee, drew attention of the Bench to letter dated 18.02.2020 by assessee addressed to the ITAT,D- Bench, Chennai, with copy to Departmental Representative, wherein it was submitted by the assessee that the assessee does not wish to proceed with this appeal filed with tribunal and has sought permission for withdrawal of the assessee’s appeal. For the sake of convenience, the assessee’s letter dated 18.02.2020 cited above is reproduced as under:-

“Madura Coats Private Limited Regd Office: 7th Floor, Jupiter 2A Block, Prestige Technology Park, Sarjapur Marthahalli Ring Road,Bangalore -560 103. Tel: + 91 -80-41900400/28440615, Fax: + 91-080-28440793/28440798, Email:coatsindia@coats.com CIN: U1802KA1974PTC047421 18 February 2020 The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) D-Bench, Chennai Dear Sir,

Assessee Madura Coats Private Limited (the Appellant) PAN AABCMB279K Assessment Year 2008-09 Subject Withdrawal of appeal before ITAT Reference We refer the aforementioned appeal for Assessment Year (“AY”) 2008-09 filed before the Hon’ble ITAT on 28 November 2019 against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] dated 30 September 2019.

In the aforementioned order, the CIT(A) upheld the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer -2, Chennai (“TPO”) stating that Comparable Uncontrolled Price method is the most appropriate method for certain transactions during AY 2008-09. The CIT(A) also directed the TPO to re-compute the adjustment after considering those transactions with Associated Enterprises (“AE”) where the price of items sold were greater than the price of similar items sold to Non-AEs.

The TPO has passed the order giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) after recomputing the adjustment as directed by the CIT(A). This has resulted in a substantial relief to the Appellant and the issue in the appeal has become infructuous as the Appellant does not have any further grievance. Accordingly, the Appellant wishes to withdraw the appeal.

It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble ITAT may be kindly be pleased to permit the Appellant to withdraw this appeal in and thereby render justice.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →