VIJAY KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4860/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 March 2022AY 2015-164 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as it had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to this request.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an addition sustained by the CIT(A). The assessee later opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme for settlement of tax arrears.

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Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.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?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

Hearing: 02.03.2022Pronounced: 02.03.2022

O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of learned CIT(Appeals)-38, New Delhi dated 26.03.2019, pertaining to the assessment year 2015-16.

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the Honorable CIT(A)-38 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining an addition of Rs. 16,21,500.00 made by the Ld AO on illegal and untenable grounds. Hence, the addition as such, may be, deleted.

2. That the Honorable CIT (A)-38 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining an addition of Rs. 16, 21,500.00 made by the Ld AO

Vijay Kumar Vs. DCIT ignoring that the notice issued u/s 143(2) is issued without application of mind and lacks the jurisdictional condition. Hence, the assessment as such, may be, deleted.

3. That the Honorable CIT (A)-38 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining an addition of Rs. 16, 21,500.00 made by the Ld AO as the order passed by the Ld AO is time barred. Hence, the assessment as such, may be, deleted.

4. That the Honorable CIT(A)-38 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs. 16,21,500.00 ignoring the facts the basis of addition is the statement and material from investigation wing which has not been provided during the course of hearing and nor cross examination provided. Hence, the addition, as such, may be deleted.

5.

That the Ld CIT(A)-13 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Long term capital gain of Rs. 16,21,500.00 under 68 on illegal and untenable grounds. Hence, the addition, as such, may be deleted.

6.

That the Ld CIT(A)-13 has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs. 16,21,500.00 under 68 ignoring the facts that Sec 68 is not applicable in the case of sale of shares. Hence, the addition, as such, may be deleted.

7.

That the appellant craves leave to add, substitute, modify or delete any grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing and all the above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.”

3.

At the outset the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that in this case the assessee has opted for vivid Se Vishwas Scheme and therefore the assessee may be permitted to withdraw the appeal filed. He submitted that the assessee has also filed application dated 24.10.2020, requesting for withdrawal of appeal, along with copy of order for full and final settlement of tax arrears under section 5(2) read with section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Act, 2020 in Form no. 5.

Vijay Kumar Vs. DCIT The Revenue has no objection to the request for withdrawal of appeal made on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee is allowed to withdraw the appeal filed.

4.

Assessee’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in open court on 02.03.2022.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →