PRAKASH KUMARI PRITHVIRAJ BAFNA,MUMBAI vs. ITO -ACIT- CC-5(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6341/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 March 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Judicial Member), Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ( (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Ld. DR did not object to the withdrawal request. The Tribunal allowed the appellant to withdraw the appeal, dismissing it as withdrawn. It was clarified that if the VSVS application is not acted upon due to any legal or technical issue, both parties are at liberty to revive the issue.

What were the facts?

The appellant filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, which confirmed the AO's addition of Rs. 27,90,000/- under Section 69A for alleged cash deposits during demonetization. During the hearing, the appellant's AR informed the Tribunal that the appellant had availed the "The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024" amnesty and sought to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be allowed to be withdrawn by the appellant who has opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “SMC” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri Pawan Singh (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Gupta
Pronounced: 03/03/2025

In the above captioned appeal, the appellant filed an appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A) stating that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in making addition of Rs. 27,90,000/-under section 69A of the Act on the ground of alleged cash deposits made during demonetarization period.

2.

During the hearing before the Bench, Ld. AR of the appellant has stated that the appellant has availed amnesty under “The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024”. Accordingly, a letter was filed dated 26.2.2025 and Form No. 2 received from the appropriate authority was enclosed. Thus, the appellant requested the Bench to allow him to withdraw the appeal.

3.

Ld. DR did not object for withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant.

4.

After hearing both sides, it is decided to allow the appellant to withdraw her appeal. In case of any legal or technical issue, if the VSVS

2 Prakash Kumari Prithviraj Bafna application was not acted upon, both the parties at liberty to revive the issue.

5.

The appeal of the appellant is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/03/2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →