THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the assessee's counsel had informed the Court that the assessee had availed the benefit of the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and did not want to press the appeals. A statement to this effect was placed on record. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. No order as to costs was made. The specific grounds of appeal and the ITAT's order were not discussed or decided on merits, as the appeals were disposed of based on the assessee's submission.
What were the facts?
The appeals were filed by the Greater Cochin Development Authority (the assessee) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench. The respondent was the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). The appeals were admitted for hearing. During the course of proceedings, the assessee's counsel informed the High Court that the assessee had availed the benefit of the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and therefore did not wish to press the appeals. A statement to this effect was placed on record.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the appeals filed by the assessee are to be dismissed as withdrawn, given the assessee's decision to avail the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and not press the appeals. Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through its counsel, stated that it had availed the benefit of the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme and consequently did not wish to press the appeals. This statement was placed on record. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. However, the revenue was represented by its Standing Counsel.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT [ITA Nos.44/2018, 46/2018] S.V.Bhatti, J. Heard Sri.Anil D.Nair and learned Standing counsel Sri.Christopher Abraham for parties. Learned counsel Mr.Anil D.Nair informs the Court that the assessee has availed the benefit of 'vivad se viswas' and the assessee does not want to press the appeals. Statement is placed on record. Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE css/
Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 4 APPENDIX OF ITA 44/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE-AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18/3/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE-BOF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE-COF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPEAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y.2011-12 ANNEXURE-DOF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 1/3/2018 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT
Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 5 APPENDIX OF ITA 46/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 17.3.2015 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE BOF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DT. 28.2.2017 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE COF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPEAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13 ANNEXURE DOF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 1.3.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT
Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 6
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
