Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed multiple appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2014-15. The issues involved included the validity of reopening assessments under sections 147 and 151, additions made under section 68 for unexplained credit, and disallowance of interest expenses under section 36(1)(iii) for advancing non-interest bearing loans. During the hearing, the assessee's representative informed the Tribunal that the appeal had been admitted in the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).
Held
Given that the assessee's appeal was admitted by the NCLT, the assessee requested that the appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) be dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty to approach the Tribunal again after the NCLT proceedings conclude. The Departmental Representative (DR) accepted this submission. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
Key Issues
Whether the reopening of assessment under sections 147/151 and additions under section 68 were valid, and whether the disallowance of interest expenses under section 36(1)(iii) was justified.
Sections Cited
147, 151, 68, 36(1)(iii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Dr. B. R. R. KumarSh. Anubhav Sharma
ORDER Per Bench: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of ld. CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 30.11.2018 and 29.12.2018. 2. Since, the issue involved in & 1696/Del/2019 are similar, they were heard together and being adjudicated by a common order. In ITA No. 1695/Del/2019, following grounds have been raised by the assessee:
“1) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in reopening the assessment u/s 147 and that too without complying with mandatory requirement of section 147 to 151 of the Act, more so when jurisdiction was not assumed as per law.
, 1696 & 1697/Del/2019 2 SRS Ltd.
2) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the reopening of the impugned assessment and framing of impugned assessment order are bad in law and against the fact and circumstance of the case. 3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in making addition of Rs.56,96,60,500/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as unexplained credit and that too without proper appreciation of facts on record, and by recording incorrect facts and findings, and making allegations without any basis, material or evidence and merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures and without observing the principal of natural justice. 4) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. Rs.56,96,60,500/- is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in passing the impugned order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and by not observing the principles of natural justice.”
In following grounds have been raised by the assessee:
“1) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in making disallowance of Rs. 66,39,000/- being interest expenses claimed on the ground that interest bearing funds were allegedly utilized for advancing non-interest bearing loans & advances u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 2) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance of Rs.66,39,000/- is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in , 1696 & 1697/Del/2019 3 SRS Ltd. confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in passing the impugned order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and by not observing the principles of natural justice.”
At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the appeal of the assessee has been admitted in the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the ITA may be dismissed at this juncture with liberty to approach the Tribunal after conclusion of the proceedings before the NCLT.
The ld. DR fairly accepted.
Hence, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 08/02/2024.