ACIT -1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ASHAJYOT MERCANTILE PVT. LTD., MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the Revenue's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal considered the assessee's submission and the lack of opposition from the Revenue. Consequently, the Tribunal granted permission to not press the appeal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee requested permission not to press the appeal due to significant accumulated losses and the tax-neutral effect of the addition on closing stock.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal should be allowed to be not pressed by the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN
ORDER
PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2012-13. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ‘Act’).
M/s Ashajyot Mercantile
The Director of the respondent-company has filed an application before the Tribunal on 07.05.2019 requesting permission for not pressing the appeal and submits that : “It is respectfully submitted that the assessee has been incurring heavy losses from past 6 years due to heavy cost of inventory and adverse market trend. Upto AY 2018-19, the accumulated loss is Rs.25,32,69,839/-. There is hardly any business activity since then. Further, and in any case, the addition on account of the closing stock has tax neutral effect as the same became part of the opening stock for the subsequent year and the years thereafter. As such, said addition would, in any case, stand allowable in the year of sale of the land. Under the above circumstances and subject to the above, the assessee desires not to contest the above appeal of the Department. This plea is solely with a view to have certainly and to end litigations so that there is no scope for any further dispute in this regard, thereby saving precious resources of both the sides from getting consumed in litigation.”
There is no opposition from the Ld. DR to the above submission of the assessee for permission for not pressing the appeal. 4. Considering the above, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/05/2019. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (N.K. PRADHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 13/05/2019 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026