SHRI SHRI KASTURCHAND BURAD,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), RAIPUR (CG)
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of the appeal as per the assessee's written request. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if they failed to avail the VSV scheme benefits for bonafide reasons.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order for AY 2012-13. The assessee subsequently requested to withdraw the appeal as they had opted for the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.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, “RAIPUR” BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI PAWAN SINGH
सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 11/08/2021 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 12/08/2021 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R
PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Raipur (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 01.03.2016 arising in the penalty order dated 26.09.2014 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2012-13.
The captioned assessee, as per written request, has sought to withdraw the appeal listed above on the ground that he has opted to (Shri Kasturchand Burad vs. DCIT) A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 - avail benefits of ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ (VSV). Reference was also made to written requests in this regard.
The ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue stated that he has no objection to withdraw the appeal in the circumstances narrated on behalf of the assessee.
In the light of written request made on behalf of the captioned assessee, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, in the event, the assessee fails to avail the benefit of VSV Scheme for any bonafide reasons, then the assessee concerned will be at liberty to seek restoration of original appeal for hearing before ITAT in accordance with law.
In the result, the captioned appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 12/08/2021 Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Raipur: Dated 12/08/2021 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, RAIPUR 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order,
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Raipur (on Tour)
More judgments on Section 271AAA
- Rosy Blue (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central…ITA 3351/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed17 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2401/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2018-19
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2400/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2399/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- B Nanji Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2398/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026