ADP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as it had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme. However, the assessee can seek revival of the appeal if the scheme benefit is denied.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2013-14. During the pendency of the appeal, the assessee opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2020.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal can be withdrawn by the assessee due to opting for the Vivad Se Viswas Scheme.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is directed against CIT(A) - 1, Hyderabad’s order dated 18/02/2019 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) rws144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing this appeal. However, on perusal of record we find that the assessee filed a letter dated 26 th March, 2021 stating therein that the assessee has opted to avail the :- 2 -: M/s ADP Pvt. Ltd, Hyderabad.
benefit under the ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020’ in prescribed Form No.1 & 2 and received Form(s)-3 in tune thereto, which is placed on record and therefore, requested the Bench to permit to withdraw this appeal of the assessee.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn since the assessee has preferred to avail the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme by filing Form No.1 & 2 and received Form(s)-3 in tune thereto, with a rider that it shall be very much open for the assessee to file for revival of this case, if the settlement benefit under the scheme is denied to it for technical reasons.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Pronounced in the open court on 21st April, 2021.
More judgments on Section 144C
- Mishoo Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 19/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 18/KOL/2026[2016-2017]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2016-2017
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 17/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 16/KOL/2026[2014-2015]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2014-2015
- Anshu Sahay, Bangalore vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), It, KolkataITTPA 15/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Susmita Das vs. The Principal Commissioner CGST And Central Excise , Bhubaneswar Commissionerate,KhurdaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Saroj Kumar Mahanandia vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S. Susanta Mohanty, Gandarpur, Cuttack vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services Tax, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Arun Kumar Mallik vs. The Commissioner, CGST, Cx And Customs,BbsrOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Sabita Khosla vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Rayagada-Ii Range, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026