MORGAN STANLEY ADVANTAGE SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 9(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7609/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 October 2017AY 2010-113 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 Tribunal considered the assessee's request and allowed the withdrawal of the appeal. Since the AO rectified the mistakes, the basis for the appeal no longer survived.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an assessment order as the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to give effect to the Dispute Resolution Panel's (DRP) directions. Subsequently, the AO rectified the mistakes under Section 154, bringing the order in conformity with the DRP's directions.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal survives when the AO has rectified the assessment order as per DRP directions. The assessee sought withdrawal of the appeal due to the rectification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(13),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘K’ BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hathiramani, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar, D.R

आदेश / O R D E R

PER RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’), dated 31.10.2014 for AY: 2010-11.

2.

The Authorized Representative (for short ‘A.R’) for the assessee Shri Tushar Hathiramani, Chartered Accountant had submitted that as the A.O had failed to give effect to the directions issued by the ‘Dispute Resolution

P a g e | Morgan Stanley Vs. DCIT Panel’ (for short ‘DRP’), dated 10.10.2014, therefore, the assessee being aggrieved had assailed the assessment order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s 144C (13) before the Tribunal. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that in the meantime the assessee had also filed an application seeking rectification of mistake with the A.O on 27.11.2014, therein requesting that mistakes be rectified and the order be brought in conformity with the directions of the ‘DRP’. The ld. A.R submitted that as the A.O had rectified the mistakes apparent from the record, vide his order passed under Sec. 154 of the ‘Act’, dated 30.04.2015, therefore, the very basis on which the appeal was filed before the Tribunal thus no more survives. The ld. A.R in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts had sought the permission of the Tribunal to allow withdrawal of the present appeal, viz. ITA No. 7609/Mum/2014. The ld. A.R had placed on record a letter of the assessee wherein a request seeking permission for withdrawal of the present appeal in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts had been raised before us. The ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘D.R’) had not objected to the request of the assessee seeking withdrawal of the present appeal.

3.

We have considered the aforesaid request of the assessee and as requested allow the withdrawal of the present appeal.

4.

The appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 05.10.2017

More judgments on Section 144C(13)

All 3,426 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(13) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →