SUNHILL CERAMICS PVT. LTD.,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.-1(1), AHMEDABAD-GUJARAT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn based on the assessee's written request.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 sought to withdraw their appeal before the ITAT. This was because the assessee had opted to avail the benefits of the 'Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020'. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal 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, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
आदेश/O R D E R
PER BENCH:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.10.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad arising out of the assessment order dated 19.02.2016 passed by the DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2010-11.
The captioned assessee has sought to withdraw the appeal listed above on the ground that assessee has opted to avail benefits of ‘Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020’ (VSV). As per letter dated 27.11.2020 filed by assessee, it is submitted that assessee does not seek to pursue the said appeal owing to exercise of option for 2 - availing VSV Scheme and consequently requested that assessee’s application for withdrawal of appeal may please be granted.
The Ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue stated that he has no objection to withdraw the appeals in the circumstances narrated on behalf of the assessee.
In the light of written requests made on behalf of the captioned party, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.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In the result, the captioned appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.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 09/12/2020
Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 09/12/2020 TRUE COPY TANMAY 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, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026