MANJU GHAI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), DEHRADUN
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Act, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee had filed an appeal for assessment year 2014-15. Subsequently, the assessee opted to settle the dispute under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 and filed the necessary declaration.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the impact of the assessee opting for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act on the pending appeal before the Tribunal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN
Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA
MANJU GHAI, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o M/S RRA TAXINDIA, Ward-1(5), D-28, SOUTH EXTENSION, Dehradun PART-I, NEW DELHI – 110 049 PAN : ABIPG9505F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Somil Aggarwal, CA Respondent by : Shri S.K. Chatterjee, Senior DR. Date of hearing : 17.08.2020 Date of pronouncement : 17.08.2020 ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, VP : This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-15 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A), Dehradun dated 05th March, 2018.
2 ITA-2628/DEL/2018 2. The captioned is a part of appeals in which information has been received that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. It has been stated that the necessary declaration in accordance with Section 4 of The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 has been filed by the assessee.
Considering the aforesaid situation, the captioned appeal is consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
However, the aforesaid is subject to a caveat that in case the dispute relating to tax arrears for the captioned assessment year is not ultimately resolved in terms of the aforestated Act, the appellant (i.e., the assessee) shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of the appeal and the Tribunal shall consider such application appropriately as per law. The respondent (i.e., the Revenue) has no objection with regard to the aforesaid caveat.
In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is consigned to record and, for statistical purposes, is treated as dismissed.
More judgments on Section 4
- Prakash Dayaram Chandnani, Rajkot vs ITO Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 927/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, DamanITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ratilal Manubhai Dhanani, Amreli vs ITO WD 3(1)(4), AmreliITA 697/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026