SHRI JIGNESH NATVERBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), SURAT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The assessee sought withdrawal of both appeals to avail the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. The Departmental Representative had no objection to the withdrawal.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed two appeals before the ITAT for Assessment Year 2009-10, one concerning quantum assessment and the other regarding a penalty. The assessee opted for the benefit of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.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, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
O R D E R
PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These two appeals by assessee are directed against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Surat, dated 05.04.2013 in the Quantum Assessment and order dated 04.12.2015 in the matter of Penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, both for the assessment year (AY) 2009-10.
ITA No.’s: 1658/AHD/2013 & 304/AHD/2016 Shri Jignesh Natvarbhai Patell for A.Y: 2009-10
At the outset itself, Shri Akshaya Modi, Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted before the Bench that Assessee has opted the benefit of the “Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020”. A copy of FORM-3 under ‘the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, filed by the assessee in the Income Tax Department on 16.12.2020 issued by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1, was also placed before the Bench. Shri Akshaya Modi, CA, on behalf of the Assessee, by way of a letter dated 24.12.2020, submitted that assessee prayed for withdrawal of both the appeals to which, the learned Departmental Representative did not raise any objection.
We have heard both the parties and gone through FORM-3 filed by the assessee to obtain the benefit of ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and noted that assessee has prayed for withdrawal of both the appeals. The Ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection if the said appeals are withdrawn by the assessee company. Consequently, we treat both these appeals as withdrawn.
In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in for AY.2009-10) are dismissed as withdrawn.
Order is pronounced on 29/12/2020, as per Rule 34 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rule 1963.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026