SANJEEV PREMKUMAR SAGGI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144B. The assessee later sought to withdraw the appeal as they had opted to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee can withdraw the appeal after opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
(Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sanjeev Premkumar Saggi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o. Divyang Shah & Co., Chartered Ward-1(1)(3), Accountants, 201, Devashish Ahmedabad Complex, Nr. Regenta Central Antarim Hotel, Off. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-380006 [PAN No.ACKPS0134P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Divyang Shah, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.08.2025 O R D E R
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed by the assessee, Shri Sanjiv Premkumar Saggi, against the assessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015–16. During the course of proceedings, the assessee has filed an application seeking permission to withdraw the appeal on the ground that he has opted to resolve the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (DVSVS-2024). In support of this request, the assessee has submitted that Form-1 has been duly filed under the said Scheme and a copy of the same has been placed on record as Annexure-A. It has further been submitted that Form-2 has been issued by the Department, indicating the amount payable/refundable under the Scheme, a copy of which has been furnished as Annexure-B.
In view of the above and considering the fact that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute through the DVSVS-2024, the appeal filed by the assessee is permitted to be withdrawn. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
The D.R. for the Revenue stated that he has no objection to withdraw the appeal.
At the outset, we observe that the appeal is time barred by 103 days. The delay of 103 days is condoned on due consideration of facts of assessee’s case and owing to causing no perceptible prejudice to other side.
In view of the submission by the assessee, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as withdrawn. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 04/08/2025
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026