ATUL C. VYAS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 31, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5017/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 December 2022AY 1992-932 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals challenging penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) for AYs 1992-93 and 1993-94. The assessee later sought to withdraw these appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee could withdraw the appeals. The appeals were withdrawn due to substantial additions being deleted by a previous Tribunal order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘A’ BENCH, MUMBAI.

Before: SHRI B.R. BASAKARAN & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

For Appellant: Mr. Dharmesh Shah
For Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha
Hearing: 27.12.2022Pronounced: 27.12.2022

O R D E R Per Bench : The assessee has filed these appeals challenging the orders passed by Ld CIT(A)-40, Mumbai confirming the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94.

2.

At the time of hearing, the assessee filed a letter dt.27.12.2022 wherein he has expressed his desire to withdraw these appeals for the reason that substantial amount of addition(s) made in both the years have been deleted by the Tribunal vide its order dt.13.12.2022 passed in and ITA No.7376/Mum/2013.

2 & 5018/Mum/2013 3. The learned Department Representative did not object to the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, we allow the assessee to withdraw both the appeals. 4. In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed as withdrawn. Pronounced in the open court on 27th Dec., 2022.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →