PAWAN AGARWAL,MATHURA vs. DY CIT ,CC , AGRA

ITA 168/AGR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 October 2026AY 2015-162 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn. This decision was based on the assessee's prayer to withdraw the appeal as not pressed, citing the settlement of their tax dues under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had paid the due tax of Rs. 1,19,41,549/- and submitted the relevant forms under the scheme. The reasoning is that once the assessee has opted for and completed the settlement process under a scheme like VSVS, the pending appeals become infructuous. The ratio decidendi is that appeals can be withdrawn if the underlying dispute is resolved through a statutory settlement scheme. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by Pawan Agrawal (the assessee) against the order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV, Kanpur, under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The CIT(A) had partly allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. The assessee, at the outset of the hearing, moved an application to withdraw the appeal as not pressed. The reason cited was that the assessee had paid the due tax of Rs. 1,19,41,549/- pursuant to an application filed under the Vivad se Vishwas (VSVS) scheme dated 27.12.2020. Copies of Forms 1, 2, and 5 related to the VSVS scheme were enclosed with the application.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide whether the appeal filed by the assessee should be dismissed as withdrawn. The assessee argued that the appeal should be dismissed as not pressed because they have settled their tax liability under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme by paying Rs. 1,19,41,549/-. The assessee supported this contention by filing Forms 1, 2, and 5 related to the VSVS scheme. The revenue, represented by the CIT(DR), heard the assessee's application. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue against the withdrawal, other than hearing the assessee's representative.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA(DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv

For Respondent: Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, CIT (DR)

Hearing: 13.10.2026Pronounced: 13.10.2026

PER:SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 14.03.2019 passed in appeal No CIT(A)-IV/10719/DCIT- CC/AGRA/2017-18/ by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- IV, Kanpur [(hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2015-16, wherein ld CIT(A) has partly allowed assessee’s appeal for statistical purposes.

At the very outset, ld representative for the appellant assessee has moved an application with a prayer to withdraw the appeal as not pressed on the ground that pursuant to appellant’s application filed under VSVS dated 27.12.2020, assessee has paid due tax of Rs. 1,19,41,549/-. The copies of F

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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →