What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeal had already been dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal on an earlier date. Therefore, the present appeal has become infructuous.

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee subsequently preferred the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and submitted relevant documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal has become infructuous and should be dismissed as withdrawn, given the assessee's participation in the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and a prior dismissal order.

M/S Om Sakthi Granites vs ACIT | ITAT Chennai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

For Appellant: Ms. N. Meenakshi, ACA

For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Hearing: 05.08.2025

O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Chennai (in short "CIT(A)") passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, (the Act) dated 09.01.2020 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2003-04.

M/s Om Sakthi Granites.

The ld. AR filed a letter dated 05.08.2025 stating that the assessee had preferred the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 and submitted copies of Form 5 and the Order Giving Effect passed pursuant to filing under VSV scheme. Accordingly the ld AR prayed that the appeal may be treated as withdrawn. However subsequently it has been brought to our attention by the registry that the impugned appeal has already been dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal vide order dated 08.03.2021. Accordingly the present appeal has become infructous and dismissed accordingly

In result the appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

M/S OM SAKTHI GRANITES,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-3, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments