TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 269
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 543/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2012-13 "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that additions made by AO in present order would not survive after order of NCLT and consequentially deleted the additions. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1661 of 2020 in the case of State Tax Officer vs. Rainbow Papers Ltd inter-alia holding as below :- "....(Para 58) 'the Appellate Authority(NCLAT) and the Adjudicating Authority erred in law in rejecting the application/appeal of the appellant. As observed above delay in filing a claim cannot be the sole ground for rejecting the claim..." "....(Para ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be the sole ground for rejecting the claim..." "....(Para 57) the definition of secured creditors in the IBC does not exclude any Government or Governmental Authority...." ".....(Para 54) the Committee of Creditors, which might include financial institutions and other financial creditors, cannot secure their own dues at the cost of statutory dues owned to any Govt. or Govtal Authority or for that matter, any other dues..." 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,10,000/- made on account of Income from House Property. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 49,42,23,216/- made u/s 68 of the Act. 5. On the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... any other dues..." 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,87,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained income. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent." 3. The assessee has filed return of income for assessment year 2012-13 as on 29-09-2012 for assessment year 2012-13. A search and seizure operation was carried in the case of assessee as on 21-09-2010. The assessee filed an application u/s. 245C(1) on 03-05-2023 for settlement of the case before Income Tax ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsactions of M/s Utkantha Trading Ltd. and 41 concerns of Mudaliar. Therefore, the Income Tax Settlement Commission refused to interfere with the order already passed by the Settlement Commission u/s. 245D(4) dated 07-11-2014 and rejected request made by PCIT u/s. 245D(6) of the Act. Thus, the assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that the Department had no authority to make the assessment u/s. 147 and the matter raised by the Department was categorically quashed by the Settlement Commission which was mis-interpreted by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 21-12-2018 overlooked the decision of Income Tax Settlement Commission and made addi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution plan shall stand extinguished. The ld. Authorized Representative relied upon the following decisions:- * Ghanshyam Mishra & Sons P. Ltd. vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. - (2021) 9 SCC 657; * Oasis Textiles Limited vs. DCIT, Ahmedabad - ITA No.87/Ahd/2019; * Garden Silk Milk Limited vs. CIT - Tax Appeal No.875 of 2013 (Gujarat); * Murli Industries Ltd. vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax - 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 6187; * Paschimahal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Ram an Ispat Private Limited and others - 2023 SCC OnLine SC 842; 6.1 The ld. Authorized Representative further submitted that in view of the order passed by the NCLT in the case of assessee approving the resolution plan all the dues under the Act whether adm....