MCKINSEY & COMPANY INDIA LLP,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-29(1), DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee had filed an application under the MAP provisions, and the Competent Authorities of India and the US had resolved the case, providing relief to the assessee. Consequently, the assessee sought to withdraw all grounds of appeal, including those related to penalty.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the final assessment order for AY 2016-17. During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee filed a request to withdraw the appeal, stating that the disputes had been resolved under the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) as per Article 27 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal can be dismissed as withdrawn due to resolution of disputes under MAP and whether penalty related grounds have become infructuous.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B,Section 271(1)(c),Section 253,Section 44G(8)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, I: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM,
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the final assessment order dated 30.06.2021 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) order dated 30.09.2020 for Assessment Year 2016-17. ITA No.- 1028/Del/2021 McKinsey & Company India LLP
When the matter was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, a written request letter dated 04.02.2026 has been filed on record by the assessee seek
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144C(3)
- Radhakishan Potharajula, Karim Nagar vs ITO (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 2340/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Neha Hiranand Motwani, Nashik vs ITO International Tax, NashikITA 1570/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Atc Tires Private Limited, Mumbai vs The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 6468/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026