MARINE ELECTRICALS (INDIA) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT C 9(2)(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3735/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 September 2024AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee sought withdrawal of the appeal, stating that relief had already been obtained through rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the original intimation under Section 143(1).

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld.Addl./JCIT(A) for AY 2021-22. The grounds of appeal included errors in determining income and disallowing payments of PF & ESIC employee contributions. However, the assessee later sought to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the assessee should be dismissed as withdrawn after seeking relief via rectification proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 37(1),Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee directed against the order dated 29-05-2024 passed by the Ld.Addl./JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar, [in short Ld.CIT(A)] for the Assessment Year (AY.) 2021-22, raising following grounds:

1.

1. “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. erred in determining the income at Rs. 10,16,11,630/- as against the returned income of Rs. 9,71,51,120/-.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. erred in disallowing the payments of PF & ESIC employee contributions of Rs. 44,60,510/-.

3. The Appellant states that the belated deposit of employees contribution of PF/ESIC governed u/s 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act1961 is also simultaneously amenable to deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act as the same was paid within the relevant financial year.”

2.

At the time hearing before us, a letter seeking withdrawal of the appeal has been filed on behalf of the assesee. In the said letter, it is submitted that the assessee has already got relief by way of rectification u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) against the impugned intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act, therefore, the assessee wanted to withdraw the impugned appeal. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →