What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the grounds raised by the Revenue. The assessee's decision not to contest the appeal led to this outcome.

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2011-12. The assessee company is undergoing voluntary liquidation and does not wish to contest the appeal to expedite the winding-up process.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be allowed based on the assessee's decision not to contest the matter due to voluntary liquidation.

DCIT vs Destimoney Enterprises P.Ltd | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla a/w, Shri Bhargav Selarka

For Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Kumar Singh

This appeal by the Revenue is against order dated 20th October 2016, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)–12, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2011–12.

The assessee, vide letter dated 19th March 2018, has requested 2. for early hearing of appeal stating therein that it has initiated the process of members voluntarily liquidation as per the provisions of 2 M/s. Destimoney Enterprises P. Ltd. Companies Act, 1956. Therefore, the company is desirous of closing its outstanding tax matters so as to facilitate completion of voluntary winding up process in a timely manner. It is stated that in order to avoid protracted litigation, the assessee does not wish to defend the present appeal. An affidavit has also been filed by Shri Berjis Desai, the Liquidator of the company, stating that the assessee does not wish to contest the present appeal. Further, at the time of hearing of the appeal, the assessee through his Counsel has filed a written submission reiterating its stand not to contest the appeal filed by the Department.

Therefore, in view of the fact that the assessee does not want to contest the appeal filed by the Revenue and, in effect, has conceded the grounds raised by the Revenue in the present appeal, we set–aside the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by allowing the grounds raised by the Revenue.

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.04.2018

Sd/- Sd/- RAJESH KUMAR SAKTIJIT DEY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 25.04.2018

3 M/s. Destimoney Enterprises P. Ltd.

DCIT 6(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. DESTIMONEY ENTERPRISES P.LTD, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments