MGM MINERALS LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

S/Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, S/Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, ld ARs appeared for appeared for the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, ld CIT Sanjay Kumar, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A), NFAC has dismissed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A), NFAC has dismissed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A), NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee holding that the assessee has opted for the Vivad Se appeal of the assessee holding that the assessee has opted for the Vivad Se appeal of the assessee holding that the assessee has opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme vide application dated 25.12.2020 pursuant to the order of Vishwas Scheme vide application dated 25.12.2020 pursuant to the order of Vishwas Scheme vide application dated 25.12.2020 pursuant to the order of P a g e 1 | 6 Pr. CIT, Bhubaneswar-1 in Form No.5 dated 5.5.2021. It was the submission of ld AR that during the course of audit, it was noticed that this finding of ld CIT(A) was erroneous and an application u/s.154 of the Act has been filed before the ld CIT(A), NFAC on 30.5.2024,copy of which is submitted as follows:

It was the submission that Form No.5 and the application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme dated 25.12.2020 was in respect of appeal pending before the Tribunal in respect of assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 24.3.2014. It was the submission that there was no application under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme in respect of the impugned assessment order passed u/s.143(3)/147 of the Act dated 28.3.2016. It was the submission that as a precautionary measure, the appeal has been field before the Tribunal. It is admittedly with a delay of 966 days for which condonation has been prayed. It was the submission that if the ld CIT(A) recalls the order which is the impugned order before the Tribunal in the present appeal as a consequence to the application u/s.154 of the Act, then the present appeal before the Tribunal would become infructuous. At this point, ld CIT DR submitted that as 154 application has been filed before the ld CIT(A) in respect of the impugned order before the Tribunal in the present appeal, the appeal of the assessee should be dismissed.

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has filed application u/s.154 of the Act against the impugned order of ld CIT(A), NFAC and as it is noticed that the present appeal is only a precautionary measure, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as application u/s.154 of the Act is pending before the ld CIT(A), NFAC against the impugned order. However, liberty is granted to the assessee for taking

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed with the direction given above.