THIRUMALA CONSTRUCTIONS,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), WARANGAL
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The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal to be withdrawn as the assessee had opted for the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme and the Revenue had issued Form-3. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. The assessee subsequently opted to avail the 'Vivad-Se-Vishwas' Scheme.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's appeal should be withdrawn due to opting for the Vivad-Se-Vishwas Scheme.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 A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI S.S. GODARA
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT–3, Hyderabad passed U/s.263 of the Income Tax Act [Act] in appeal No.Pr.CIT-3/Hyd/263/2017-18, dated 22-03-2018 for the AY: 2013-14.
At the outset, Ld.AR submitted before us that the assessee desires to withdraw his appeal as the assessee has opted to avail ‘Vivad-Se-Vishwas’ Scheme. He further submitted that the assessee had filed Form No.1 & 2 and has receive Form-3 from the Revenue. It was therefore pleaded, that the appeal of the assessee may be allowed to be withdrawn as per the scheme.
The Ld. DR conceded to the request of the Ld.AR.
Having heard both the parties through video conference, We are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee to be withdrawn yielding to the prayer of the Ld. AR as the assessee has preferred to avail the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme by filing Form No.1 & 2 and the Revenue has issued form 3 to the assessee as per the scheme. The Ld. DR has also conceded to the request of the Ld. AR. Accordingly, We hereby dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn. However, we also make it clear that, if the assessee’s case is not accepted in the Vivad- Se-Vishwas scheme by the Revenue for whatsoever may be the reason, then the assessee shall be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Petition before the Tribunal within the time limit prescribed under the Act to reinstate the appeal. It is ordered accordingly.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- 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 →- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026