What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee sought to withdraw the appeals as the dispute was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.

The Revenue filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders for assessment years 2010-11 to 2014-15. The assessee requested withdrawal of these appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeals should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee settling the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

ACIT vs M/S Mangalore Refinery… | ITAT Panaji 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 31.03.2022Pronounced: 31.03.2022

Date of Hearing: 31.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 31.03.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 20.02.2018 & 27.01.2017 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mangaluru, in respect of the Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15.

At the outset, the ld. AR of the assessee has requested for withdrawal of these appeals vide application dated 30.03.2022 stating therein that the assessee has settled the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020”. A certificate to this effect under Section 5(1) of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has also been filed.

The Ld. DR has no objection.

In view of the above, we accept the request of the assessees for withdrawal of the appeals.

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.03.2022.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1 (1), MANGALURU vs. M/S MANGALORE REFINERY PETROCHEMICALS LIMITED, MANGALURU

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments