SHIRISH ARVIND JOSHI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 2(2), KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6884/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 April 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed an application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme to settle the dispute. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) confirming a penalty levied under section 271B. The assessee had incurred a loss in trading in future and options and contended that no audit was required.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme to settle the dispute.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SMT BEENA PILLAI & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)
Hearing: 02.04.2025Pronounced: 03.04.2025

सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date of Hearing 02.04.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date of Pronouncement 03.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] order dated 23/03/2022 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2015-16. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “Appellant is aggrieved with the impugned order dated 08/11/2024 issued u/s. 250 of the Act, 1961 for AY 2015-16 issued by NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC).

A.Y. 2015-16. Shirish Arvind Joshi 1. That, the impugned order dated 08/11/2024 issued u/s. 250 is passed against the basic principle of natural justice.

2.

That, the assessee had in incurred a loss in the said financial year from trading in future and options. In this all statements as regards to this, had been already given in assessment. Our contention is that we have done trading in future & option shares. Hence, we request you to consider this as a Business of Trading volume comprises of both future & option. In this turnover is calculated on the basis of profit & loss summation. In this we request you to kindly treat the difference (Profit Loss) which is below 1 Cr Limit of Audit, which is the method of Calculating turnover in future & option. As a result of this, there is no need to conduct Audit. Hence, we request you to delete Penalty Proceedings initiated against under section 271B of ITR Act 1961. An Appellant reserve right to add points in the course of an Appeal 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, to amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated here-in-above, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal”

2. This appeal is filed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- which has levied u/s. 271B of the Act by the Ld.AO vide his order dated, 23/03/2022.

3.

At the outset it has been submitted by the Ld.AR that, the assessee has filed an application under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS), with intention to settle the dispute. In view of this fact the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the assessee would be at liberty to revive the appeal in case his application under VSV Scheme does not become final.

4.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 03.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →