DISCOVERY ASIA LLC,GURGAON vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals ex-parte after hearing the Department's representative and perusing the records. The assessee's request to treat the appeals as withdrawn was accepted.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals for assessment years 2012-13 and 2011-12. Despite notices, the assessee or its representative did not appear for the hearings. The assessee later filed applications to withdraw the appeals.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals should be dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's application and the provisions of the DTAA.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT
ORDER PER BENCH These two appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2011-12 are directed against the separate orders of the AO.
In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the 2. Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor its authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeals exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.
At the time of hearing, we find that assessee filed applications dated 3.11.2017 stating therein that the assessee had earlier invoked the provisions of Article 27 – Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) of the DTAA and had filed an application with the US Competent Authority who vide Resolution dated 24.08.2017 issued u/s. 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Article 27 of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and the said Resolution is acceptable to the assessee. The assessee in the aforesaid applications requested to treat the appeals as withdrawn. The Ld. DR did not object if the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
3. In view of the above, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced on 16/01/2018.
More judgments on Section 90
- Amar Rameshkumar Bhalodia, Rajkot vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1), RajkotITA 641/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Fireeye Ireland Limited, Ireland vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITITA 1431/DEL/2025[2022-2023]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- Archana Gupta, New Delhi vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3123/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Shishir Dhatwalia, Hamirpur vs Circle 1(1) Jalpaiguri, JalpaiguriITA 2583/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Raghava Gupta Valiveti, Bangalore vs Income Tax Officer Ward 5(3)(4), BangaloreITA 2744/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026