HARSHA RAJAN MEHROTRA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 31(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5854/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 August 2022AY 2012-133 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the issues were settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if there were technical reasons.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) challenging various disallowances and additions. The assessee later filed an application stating that the issues were settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the withdrawal of the appeal due to settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, rendering the original grounds of appeal moot.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 50C,Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

For Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh, D.R

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Harsha Rajan Asst. Commissioner of Mehrotra, Income Tax 31(1), 18/63, Sliver Sands, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Off Link Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Oshiwara, Mumbai – 400 051 Jogeshwari West, Mumbai – 400 012 PAN: AFLPM1093B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Tejinder Pal Singh, D.R. Date of Hearing : 12 . 07 . 2022 Date of Pronouncement : 04 . 08 . 2022 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: HEARD

Assessee Mr. Harsha Rajan Mehrotra by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 28.06.2017 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-42, Mumbai challenging the disallowance of Rs.2,55,110/- claimed by the assessee as business expenditure; making the addition of Rs.5,39,000/- under section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) making addition for Rs.47,78,287/- for long term capital gain; making disallowance of Rs.19,395/- claimed by the 2 Mr. Harsha Rajan Mehrotra assessee on account of car insurance and making disallowance of Rs.45,113/- claimed by the assessee on account of service tax under section 43B of the Act.

2.

However, at the very outset, it is brought to our notice that on 15.03.2022 assessee filed an application through its Chartered Accountant namely Mr. Lalit Munoyat stating therein that the issues raised in the present appeal stood settled as per Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS) and assessee be allowed to withdraw the present appeal.

3.

Keeping in view the application moved by the assessee present appeal filed by the assessee is allowed to be withdrawn claimed to have been settled under VSVS. However, in case of any technical reasons assessee is at liberty to get the present appeal restored by moving an application before the Tribunal.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04.08.2022.

More judgments on Section 50C

All 3,223 judgments and leading authorities on Section 50C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →