M/S WINSOME FOUNDATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHD

ITA/127/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01006022201923 April 2021Author: MR JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH,MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Winsome Foundation, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The appeal challenged an order dated 12.7.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench. The ITAT had dismissed the assessee's appeal against the denial of exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The High Court admitted the appeal on 3.10.2019. Subsequently, the assessee filed an application (CM No. 4414-CII of 2021) seeking permission to withdraw the appeal, stating that it had availed the "Vivad Se Vishwas 2020" Scheme.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the application (CM No. 4414-CII of 2021) filed by the assessee seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. The Court noted that the assessee had availed the "Vivad Se Vishwas 2020" Scheme. The Revenue had no objection to this request. Consequently, the main appeal, ITA No. 127 of 2019, was taken up for hearing on the same day and was dismissed as withdrawn. The ITAT's order dated 12.7.2018, which dismissed the assessee's appeal against the denial of exemption under Section 11(2) for AY 2008-09, was not adjudicated on its merits by the High Court. No specific finding was recorded on the substantive issues related to the denial of exemption.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be permitted to be withdrawn in light of the assessee availing the "Vivad Se Vishwas 2020" Scheme? (Question of procedure/law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that it had availed the "Vivad Se Vishwas 2020" Scheme and therefore sought permission to withdraw the present appeal. The assessee relied on the provisions of the "Vivad Se Vishwas 2020" Scheme. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice of the application and stated that it had no objection to the request made by the appellant-assessee regarding the withdrawal of the present appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 11(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 23.4.2021 M/s Winsome Foundation .... Appellant versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, C-1 (1), Chandigarh ... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jaswant Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sant Parkash [The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court.] Present Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant. Jaswant Singh, J. (Oral) The appellant-assessee-Society has filed the instant appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), against the order dated 12.7.2018 (Annexure A-5) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'SMD', Chandigarh, whereby

the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee against the order of denial of exemption under Section 11(2) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2008-09, was dismissed.

The appeal is admitted vide order dated 3.10.2019. Now CM No. 4414-CII of 2021 has been filed by the applicant- appellant seeking permission to withdraw the appeal as it has availed the Scheme “Vivad Se

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →