ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ACQUEON TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2786/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 November 2025AY 2014-15Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member), Shri Jagadish (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal after finding the reasons bonafide. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme and thus the appeal filed by the Revenue was liable to be dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2014-15, which was filed with a delay of 30 days. The assessee had opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2024 for settlement of the tax dispute.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme for settlement of the tax dispute.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Hearing: 06.11.2025Pronounced: 06.11.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.2786/Chny/2024
C.O. No. 7/Chny/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 11.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 30 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons.

Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication.

3.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing, by filing Form 2 under DTVSV 2024, the ld. AR Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate submits that the assessee has opted to avail the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2024 for the above assessment year under consideration. He has further submitted that the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be treated as withdrawn.

4.

The ld. DR Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT did not oppose to the submissions of the ld. AR.

5.

Having heard both the parties, we note that the assessee opted for the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2024 and filed Form 2 vide Acknowledgement No. 997270321101025 dated 10.10.2025 for AY 2014-15 towards settlement of pending tax dispute. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the appeal filed by the Revenue is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn as prayed by the ld. AR. However, it is open to the assessee to approach the Tribunal by filing an 3 & CO No. 7/Chny/25 appropriate application in the event of any prejudice caused in respect of the settlement of tax dispute under the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme 2024. Thus, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn. C.O. No. 7/Chny/2025 6. In view of our decision in Revenue’s appeal, wherein, we dismissed the appeal in view of filing of Form 2 under DTVSV 2024 and acknowledgement thereon, consequently, the Cross Objection arising out of the said Revenue’s appeal in becomes academic and dismissed accordingly.

7.

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →