What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal rejected the adjournment petition. As the appellant opted for VSVS, their appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to reinstate if VSVS is not accepted by the Department.

The appellant sought an adjournment on the grounds that they had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) 2.0 and were awaiting Form No. 2. The Revenue did not object to the adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether to grant adjournment for opting for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) 2.0 when the case is fixed for hearing.

International Construction Co. vs ACIT | ITAT Mumbai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “H(SMC

Before: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Salunkhe

Pronounced: 27/06/2025

Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :- In the above captioned appeal, the case was fixed for hearing on 12.6.2025 before Hon'ble H Bench. Ld. AR of the appellant filed a letter stating that the appellant has opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) 2.0 for submission of tax dispute and he is waiting for Form No. 2 from the concerned Departmental authority. They have enclosed a screen-shot for perusal of the Bench. It is requested the Bench to adjourn the matter.

Ld. DR did not object for the submissions made by Ld. AR.

After hearing Ld. DR and perusing letter and enclosures, it is decided to reject the adjournment petition filed by the Ld. AR. As the appellant has opted for VSVS, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed as withdrawn. Anyhow, the appellant can reinstate the appeal, it is given liberty to revive the appeal in case VSVS was not accepted by the Department.

The appeal of the appellant is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/06/2025.

INTERNATIONAL CONSTRUCTION CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 22 (1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments