Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s order which deleted an addition of Rs. 2,13,34,684/- made by the Assessing Officer. This addition was based on enhancing the assessee's gross profit due to non-genuine purchases. The assessee was undergoing insolvency proceedings, and a resolution plan was approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, which extinguished all past liabilities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that due to the approved resolution plan in the insolvency proceedings, all past liabilities were extinguished. Therefore, the appeal was rendered infructuous.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is infructuous due to the insolvency resolution plan extinguishing past liabilities.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai R. No. 1918, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 …………… Appellant M/s. Ushdev International Ltd. Vs 6th New Harileela House, Mint Road, Fort, Respondent ……………. Mumbai – 400 001. [PAN: AAACU1672R] Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Vijay Bhatt For the Respondent/Department : Shri Ajay Singh Date Conclusion of hearing : 30.09.2024 Pronouncement of order : 08.10.2024 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. By way of the present appeal the Revenue has challenged the order dated 22/04/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-6, Mumbai, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had decided the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 28/03/2014, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal : Assessment Year: 2009-10
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,13,34,684/- made by the Assessing Officer by enhancing the gross profit of the assessee on the basis of non-genuine purchases booked by the assessee.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,13,34,684/- made by the Assessing Officer without considering the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT-Vs-Durga Prasad 82 ITR 540 even when the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of transaction of produce the purchase parties.”
When the present appeal was taken up for hearing, a copy of common order, dated 29/04/20221, passed by the Tribunal in the case of the Assessee was placed on record. On perusal of the same we note that vide order, dated 14/05/2018, petition [CP No. 1790/I&BC/NCLT/MB/MAH/2017] filed by State Bank of India against the Assessee under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted. Thereafter, vide order, dated 03/02/2022, passed in IA No. 1447/MB/C-II/2021 in CP(IB) No. 1790/MB/C-II/2017, resolution plan was approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court II. As per the said order, all past liabilities arising out of any levies/tax dues to any government authority not forming part of the resolution plan and pertaining to pre- corporate insolvency resolution process period stand extinguished. In view of the aforesaid, the present appeal is 1 Passed in cross-appeals for Assessment Years 2008-09 (ITA No. 3209 & 3794 /Mum/2018), 2009-2010, (ITA No. 1770 & 1790/Mum/2018) 2010-11 (ITA No. 1771&1791/Mum/2018), and 2012-13 (ITA No. 1772 & 1792/Mum/2018), and Assessee’s Appeal for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 (ITA No. 2909 /Mum/2018), and 2014-2015 (ITA No. 2910/Mum/2018)
2 Assessment Year: 2009-10 disposed of as being infructuous with liberty to the Revenue to approach the Tribunal in case of variation/change in the order dated 03/02/2022 and/or the approved resolution plan.
In result, the appeal is dismissed.