ACCRETIVE HEALTH SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1014/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 September 2018AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Transfer Pricing Officer had already deleted the addition through a rectification order. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a Transfer Pricing Officer's order. During the hearing, the assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as it had become infructuous.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to a subsequent rectification order deleting the original addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 92C(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “I-2” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI L.P. SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sahani, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anchal Khandelwal

PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 15.01.2015 passed by Ld. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Transfer Pricing Officer-1(1), New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

During the course of hearing, at the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted he has the instruction to withdraw this appeal and furnished a copy of request letter dated 17.09.2018 which is placed on record.

3.

In his rival submissions, learned Department Representative did not object if the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

4.

After considering the submissions of both the parties and the material available on record, it is noticed that the assessee- company furnished a letter dated 17.09.2018 stating therein as under:

1.

“This is to inform that the assessee had filed a rectification application dated 11.01.2016 under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “IT Act”) before the Ld. TPO submitting that the error has crept in inadvertently while giving effect to DRP order. It was pointed out that the OP/OC margin is 16.22% and it is entitled for benefit of +/- 5% as per the proviso u/s 92C(2) of the IT Act. It is submitted that the Ld. TPO has passed the order under Section 154 of the IT Act and deleted the TP addition. The said order dated 21.06.2016 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure 2. That, since the present appeal was filed before the Ld. Tribunal against the said TP addition and since the said addition has been deleted by the Ld. TPO itself in the said order dated 21.06.2016, the present appeal has become infructuous and hence, we request you to allow us to withdraw the same.”

5.

In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →