ARVIND KUMAR AGARWAL (HUF),NEW DELLHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-41(1), NEW DELLHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5201/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 November 2020AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee subsequently requested withdrawal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 5(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU

For Appellant: Shri. Arun Mishra, Adv
For Respondent: Shri. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 26.11.2020Pronounced: 26.11.2020

ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, VP : This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-15 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A), New Delhi dated 05.04.2019.

2.

The learned counsel for the assessee, vide its letter dated 24.11.2020, received through email, has requested for withdrawal of the appeal filed by him and stated that the assessee has opted to settle the dispute relating to the tax arrears for the assessment year under consideration under the Vivad

2 ITA-5201/Del/2019 Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. A certificate to this effect under Section 5(1) of The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 has also been filed.

3.

Learned Senior DR has no objection.

4.

In view of the above, we accept the request of the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Above decision was announced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 26th November, 2020.

More judgments on Section 5(1)

All 1,811 judgments and leading authorities on Section 5(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →