TEXAS INSTRUMENTS(INDIA) PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee sought to withdraw the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's submission for withdrawal.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed an order giving effect to the CIT's order, allowing some issues in favor of the assessee. However, a new addition was made regarding disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia).
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be permitted to withdraw its appeal before the Tribunal due to subsequent developments in the assessment proceedings.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE
Per Asha Vijayaraghavan, Judicial Member
This appeal is against the order dated 11.03.2014 of the Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, Bangalore for the assessment year 2007-08.
At the time of hearing of the appeal, the ld. counsel for the assessee has filed an application dated 13.10.2015 and stated that the assessee is IT(TP)A No.1268/Bang/2014 Page 2 of 3 not pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds that subsequent to filing of the appeal before the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer has passed an order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 i.e., order giving effect to the order of the ld. CIT, allowing the issues of ESOP/ESPP and Depreciation on finance leased asset in favour of the assessee. However, in the said order, the AO has made addition in respect of disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act against which the assessee has preferred appeal before the CIT(Appeals). In the above circumstances, it was the plea of the ld. counsel for the assessee that withdrawal of the assessee’s appeal may be permitted.
We have heard both the parties. The submissions made by the ld. counsel for the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal are accepted and as such, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 4.
Pronounced in the open court on this 13th day of October, 2015.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026