Case Law Details
Cloudtail India Private Limited Vs CIT (Delhi High Court)
Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents. He states that AO has given reasons for rejecting petitioner’s Form 13 application for Nil/lower withholding tax certificate. He also states that as there was limited scrutiny for A/Y 2018-19, the provision for slow and ageing inventory was not examined by the AO.
Mr. Bhatia, however, states that as now in the writ petition the petitioner has clarified that the provision creating slow and ageing inventory in relation to the relevant AY has not been claimed as a deduction in the said year, the matter can be sent back to the AO for re-examination.
Though in rejoinder, learned senior counsel for the petitioner disputes the contention advanced by learned counsel for the respondent, yet he has no objection to the matter being remanded back to the AO.
Accordingly, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent, the impugned order dated 28thApril, 2021 [received vide email on 18th June, 2021] passed by respondent no. 2, Income Tax Officer (TDS), Circle 73(1), under Section 197(1) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2021-22 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the AO to determine the said application afresh in accordance with law. Respondent no. 2 shall pass a reasoned order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the authorised representative of the petitioner within four weeks.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
